Hillary has actually slipped 11 ECVs from her peak today, i.e. from 322-332 to 311-321 currently.
Incidentally, there's was a riveting 10 minute interview featuring former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani just after the start of Lou Dobbs Tonight on the Fox Business Channel yesterday as linked to below and well worth watching. I can't imagine that anything remotely as strong as this would ever be allowed on our TV networks.
Not that we'd ever be allowed have a right of centre broadcaster in the first place.
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
Remarkably similar to a post I've made on pb.com within the past month.
Just sayin'....
Of course, people occasionally forget that most of the USA was never a British colony and reversion to 1776 would be a hotchpotch, to put it mildly. It's also the reason why all these scary Hispanics are threatening to influence tomorrow's vote. A lot of "Hispanics", incidentally, are descendants of native Americans christianised by the Spanish. What a tangled web we wove...
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
That PA poll has to worry Clinton, as do those House polls showing the GOP surging, but nearly all the other polls look fairly good. I still think she's winning, but I'm not going anywhere near the spread bets, as weird results seem perfectly possible either way.
Roger/Tyson last thread - I think some Brexiteers are the nastier kind of nationalist and nearly all nasty nationalists are Brexiteers. But one shouldn't generalise beyond that. The instinct to control your destiny more effectively by national sovereignty is entirely understandable, even if (as I personally think) it's largely illusory in today's world.
Interesting. It has heavily weighted methodology, among other things asking how the respondents think their neighbors will vote as a way of eliciting secret sympathy (and most people in PA think by a 12-point margin that their neighbors will vote Trump...hmm).
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
Just as an observation could the Senate end up 50 all ?
It certainly can, in which case whoever's elected Vice-President actually has to work for his pay for once, as he'll have to preside over the Senate in person to break any ties.
Why did they have a Senate that has an equal number of members (giving DC only one Senator would fix that). Similarly for the number of electoral votes!!
I think the intention of the Founding Fathers was that the VP's day job was to actually preside over the Senate, but after the first VP, John Adams, took a very active role as President of the Senate, the Senate didn't much care for that and since the VP has only actively presided when the Senate's tied.
Fun fact: The states have to have equal representation in the Senate. That's the only super-entrenched part of the Constitution - it can't be amended even by the usual amendment process.
Interesting, how is it entrenched?
Article 5 of the US Constitution covers the mechanism by which the Constitution can be amended. It specifically prohibits any amendment to the Constitution which deprives a state of equal representation in the Senate without its consent.
Thanks! So they could amend it if they had consent, or would they need continuing consent after amendment?
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
It's not just about trade. I don't like political integration. You do like political integration. For you, EU citizenship is something you love. For me, it's an imposition. That's the difference between us.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
I've been taking a look at the 2012 exit polls and most of them were darned accurate. For example, in Kansas the exit poll was Rep 60.0%, Dem 38.00%, and the result was Rep 59.71%, Dem 37.99%.
In Pennsylvania the exit poll was Dem 52.16%, Rep 46.84% and the result was Dem 51.97%, Rep 46.59%.
That PA poll has to worry Clinton, as do those House polls showing the GOP surging, but nearly all the other polls look fairly good. I still think she's winning, but I'm not going anywhere near the spread bets, as weird results seem perfectly possible either way.
Roger/Tyson last thread - I think some Brexiteers are the nastier kind of nationalist and nearly all nasty nationalists are Brexiteers. But one shouldn't generalise beyond that. The instinct to control your destiny more effectively by national sovereignty is entirely understandable, even if (as I personally think) it's largely illusory in today's world.
Interesting. It has heavily weighted methodology, among other things asking how the respondents think their neighbors will vote as a way of eliciting secret sympathy (and most people in PA think by a 12-point margin that their neighbors will vote Trump...hmm).
Yes it also has Trump winning nearly 30% of blacks, 40% of Hispanic voters and 3/5 of Asians and with only a 3 point deficit among women. Not sure that's 100% plausible.
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
I thought that Texas was the only state with a right to leave?
If memory serves, the Republic of Texas entered the Union with something in writing saying it could leave (or convert itself to up to four states) if it wanted. However, post-Civil War the legal status is that it just can't, tough titty.
Just as an observation could the Senate end up 50 all ?
It certainly can, in which case whoever's elected Vice-President actually has to work for his pay for once, as he'll have to preside over the Senate in person to break any ties.
Why did they have a Senate that has an equal number of members (giving DC only one Senator would fix that). Similarly for the number of electoral votes!!
I think the intention of the Founding Fathers was that the VP's day job was to actually preside over the Senate, but after the first VP, John Adams, took a very active role as President of the Senate, the Senate didn't much care for that and since the VP has only actively presided when the Senate's tied.
Fun fact: The states have to have equal representation in the Senate. That's the only super-entrenched part of the Constitution - it can't be amended even by the usual amendment process.
Interesting, how is it entrenched?
The article that defines the amendment process says that no state may be deprived of its equal representation in the Senate without its consent. So, the only way for that to happen is either for that article to itself be amended first, or for all the states to consent to an amendment that ends their equal representation.
That PA poll has to worry Clinton, as do those House polls showing the GOP surging, but nearly all the other polls look fairly good. I still think she's winning, but I'm not going anywhere near the spread bets, as weird results seem perfectly possible either way.
Roger/Tyson last thread - I think some Brexiteers are the nastier kind of nationalist and nearly all nasty nationalists are Brexiteers. But one shouldn't generalise beyond that. The instinct to control your destiny more effectively by national sovereignty is entirely understandable, even if (as I personally think) it's largely illusory in today's world.
Interesting. It has heavily weighted methodology, among other things asking how the respondents think their neighbors will vote as a way of eliciting secret sympathy (and most people in PA think by a 12-point margin that their neighbors will vote Trump...hmm).
Isn't this the old "My friend" when people are actually referring to themselves (in polling terms) ?
Might be a good way to work out what is going on if so..
God! I'm fed up with Brexit. I knew it was going to be a huge mess. But still! Today we have our mediocrity of a prime minister on a completely pointless "trade mission" to India with her infantile trade minister pretending to map out a post Brexit future.. Meanwhile her other minister tells Parliament it can't dictate anything because that would reveal the government's negotiating hand. When in fact Theresa May doesn't have negotiating hand, or at least not one she is willing to own up to.
This stuff is tricky. Why can't she treat us - the Indians, her EU partners and the people of Britain as grown ups?
Just as an observation could the Senate end up 50 all ?
It certainly can, in which case whoever's elected Vice-President actually has to work for his pay for once, as he'll have to preside over the Senate in person to break any ties.
Why did they have a Senate that has an equal number of members (giving DC only one Senator would fix that). Similarly for the number of electoral votes!!
I think the intention of the Founding Fathers was that the VP's day job was to actually preside over the Senate, but after the first VP, John Adams, took a very active role as President of the Senate, the Senate didn't much care for that and since the VP has only actively presided when the Senate's tied.
Fun fact: The states have to have equal representation in the Senate. That's the only super-entrenched part of the Constitution - it can't be amended even by the usual amendment process.
Interesting, how is it entrenched?
Article 5 of the US Constitution covers the mechanism by which the Constitution can be amended. It specifically prohibits any amendment to the Constitution which deprives a state of equal representation in the Senate without its consent.
Thanks! So they could amend it if they had consent, or would they need continuing consent after amendment?
It needs 66% support in the Senate AND House to enact a change - and 75% ratification (38 States) before the amendment becomes part of the Constitution. Since at the moment the Senate is about to split 50-50 this seems unlikely. (There is often a time limit imposed as well, but that is not mandatory).
I've been taking a look at the 2012 exit polls and most of them were darned accurate. For example, in Kansas the exit poll was Rep 60.0%, Dem 38.00%, and the result was Rep 59.71%, Dem 37.99%.
In Pennsylvania the exit poll was Dem 52.16%, Rep 46.84% and the result was Dem 51.97%, Rep 46.59%.
The choice that time was between "Rich and respectable" Romney or Barry "Clearly a decent chap" Obama. I expect people might struggle a bit more to admit they voted for either of this pair.
That PA poll has to worry Clinton, as do those House polls showing the GOP surging, but nearly all the other polls look fairly good. I still think she's winning, but I'm not going anywhere near the spread bets, as weird results seem perfectly possible either way.
Roger/Tyson last thread - I think some Brexiteers are the nastier kind of nationalist and nearly all nasty nationalists are Brexiteers. But one shouldn't generalise beyond that. The instinct to control your destiny more effectively by national sovereignty is entirely understandable, even if (as I personally think) it's largely illusory in today's world.
Interesting. It has heavily weighted methodology, among other things asking how the respondents think their neighbors will vote as a way of eliciting secret sympathy (and most people in PA think by a 12-point margin that their neighbors will vote Trump...hmm).
The neighbours question is interesting but I'd want to see more evidence that it really does pick up shy Trumpsters among respondents or is it that they live next door to shy Hillary supporters?
@Tyson The other thing we need to know about Brexit ( and the biggest piece of info comes tomorrow ) is whether there has been contagion. The West is in trouble. What we don't know yet is whether Brexit is Sui Generis or part of a new normal. We've always had these kinds of anti intellectual populist movements ( from Lib Dem By Election wins to the FN. ) They perform a role in democracies. What we don't yet know is if this has now spead to " illiberal Democracy " where these movements win power ( Hungry, Brexit, Philippines ) via democratic means. If in 10 months time it's Clinton, Juppe and a centrist German Chancellor Brexit will look very different to if it's Trump, Sarkozy and the CDU beholden to the AfD and CSU.
Just as an observation could the Senate end up 50 all ?
It certainly can, in which case whoever's elected Vice-President actually has to work for his pay for once, as he'll have to preside over the Senate in person to break any ties.
Why did they have a Senate that has an equal number of members (giving DC only one Senator would fix that). Similarly for the number of electoral votes!!
I think the intention of the Founding Fathers was that the VP's day job was to actually preside over the Senate, but after the first VP, John Adams, took a very active role as President of the Senate, the Senate didn't much care for that and since the VP has only actively presided when the Senate's tied.
Fun fact: The states have to have equal representation in the Senate. That's the only super-entrenched part of the Constitution - it can't be amended even by the usual amendment process.
Interesting, how is it entrenched?
Article 5 of the US Constitution covers the mechanism by which the Constitution can be amended. It specifically prohibits any amendment to the Constitution which deprives a state of equal representation in the Senate without its consent.
Thanks! So they could amend it if they had consent, or would they need continuing consent after amendment?
It needs 66% support in the Senate AND House to enact a change - and 75% ratification (38 States) before the amendment becomes part of the Constitution. Since at the moment the Senate is about to split 50-50 this seems unlikely. (There is often a time limit imposed as well, but that is not mandatory).
I've been taking a look at the 2012 exit polls and most of them were darned accurate. For example, in Kansas the exit poll was Rep 60.0%, Dem 38.00%, and the result was Rep 59.71%, Dem 37.99%.
In Pennsylvania the exit poll was Dem 52.16%, Rep 46.84% and the result was Dem 51.97%, Rep 46.59%.
Quite right, the exit polling and indeed the networks' live decision desks are usually absolutely superb. You have to go back 16 years to find a critical error, and even then in bizarre chad-hung circumstances in Florida.
I've been taking a look at the 2012 exit polls and most of them were darned accurate. For example, in Kansas the exit poll was Rep 60.0%, Dem 38.00%, and the result was Rep 59.71%, Dem 37.99%.
In Pennsylvania the exit poll was Dem 52.16%, Rep 46.84% and the result was Dem 51.97%, Rep 46.59%.
The choice that time was between "Rich and respectable" Romney or Barry "Clearly a decent chap" Obama. I expect people might struggle a bit more to admit they voted for either of this pair.
When/ how do we get the actual values of the exit polls. It is fine that "CNN calls Kentucky for Trump" - but a margin would be very useful.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Tyson is a leftie, so therefore he is on the side of righteousness, goodness, decency, and everything that is right and proper and a perfect human being. You're just rightwing scum, so you're bound to want Trump to win.
God! I'm fed up with Brexit. I knew it was going to be a huge mess. But still! Today we have our mediocrity of a prime minister on a completely pointless "trade mission" to India with her infantile trade minister pretending to map out a post Brexit future.. Meanwhile her other minister tells Parliament it can't dictate anything because that would reveal the government's negotiating hand. When in fact Theresa May doesn't have negotiating hand, or at least not one she is willing to own up to.
This stuff is tricky. Why can't she treat us - the Indians, her EU partners and the people of Britain as grown ups?
Sadly this won't end anytime soon. We're going to have years of grinding discussions on trade deals - probably a whole parasitic industry will spring up around them - many of which will collapse in stalemate and disappointment.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
It's not just about trade. I don't like political integration. You do like political integration. For you, EU citizenship is something you love. For me, it's an imposition. That's the difference between us.
Well yes that is a difference between us. And as it happens I find your position on the Sean coherent, principled and honourable. I just happen to disagree with you but I have completed and utter respect for your point of view. However it's a minority view. To get it's self over the line Leave went with Labour red posters promising more money for the national religion. It blames foreigners for everything. It's like the Lib Dems defending Human Rights by going on about Dog Poo or opposing House Building or pretending to be X, Y or Z in individual seats. It's a great strategy unless you win as Nick Clegg and one part of the Leave coalition are about to find out.
God! I'm fed up with Brexit. I knew it was going to be a huge mess. But still! Today we have our mediocrity of a prime minister on a completely pointless "trade mission" to India with her infantile trade minister pretending to map out a post Brexit future.. Meanwhile her other minister tells Parliament it can't dictate anything because that would reveal the government's negotiating hand. When in fact Theresa May doesn't have negotiating hand, or at least not one she is willing to own up to.
This stuff is tricky. Why can't she treat us - the Indians, her EU partners and the people of Britain as grown ups?
Sadly this won't end anytime soon. We're going to have years of grinding discussions on trade deals - probably a whole parasitic industry will spring up around them - many of which will collapse in stalemate and disappointment.
weve already had that, it's called financial services
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
Yes, that's quite a common sentiment on here. It is, as you say, utterly bizarre that anyone could hold that view – especially someone as demonstrably intelligent as Sean Fear.
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
Isn't there a two-year period of negotiation of transfer of power?
Does the US Constitution have an Article 50?
Actually there are strong legal arguments that no American state can secede from the United States. Once you join, you can never leave.
The Civil War settled that no state can unilaterally secede, but there's nothing in the constitution to say that states can't secede by mutual consent. It's very hard to consider a scenario where that would happen though.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
Didn't really work though did it? Osborne in particular seems like a man reborn.
Personally, I regard myself as patriotic rather than nationalist. I do not take a "my country, right or wrong" attitude and nor do I consider it to be inherently superior to all others, but I do reserve the right to regard it as both special and worth preserving. Make of that what you will.
If only we nasty, vitriolic Nats could aspire to the special patriotism of 'death to traitors, freedom for Britain', 'Breaking Point', 'Enemies of the People' and ''We won! Now send them back'. We'll just have to comfort ourselves by reflecting on the no doubt minor achievement of managing not to murder or assault anyone.
I'm just glad I haven't bet much on turnout on this election.
I'm +6 (up to 62%) -13 (62% up)
those are in pounds, not thousands...
I spent a week in Las Vegas and came out a full 2 dollars up. I don't do that kind of gambling...it makes me too nervous. I met an American at the bar at the airport, I told him I made 2 bucks...he bought me a drink and I told me I was lucky not to come out at least three grand out of pocket. He said 90% of punters at Vegas lose in gambling just as much as they pay for hotels, food and entertainment.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
Having seen the campaign unfold, and Trump's character flaws exposed, I've concluded that winding up Lefties is not sufficient reason to wish him to win. I've no liking for Clinton, but would sooner entrust her with the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. I've posted plenty of critical comments about Trump on this site.
I'm just glad I haven't bet much on turnout on this election.
I'm +6 (up to 62%) -13 (62% up)
those are in pounds, not thousands...
I spent a week in Las Vegas and came out a full 2 dollars up. I don't do that kind of gambling...it makes me too nervous. I met an American at the bar at the airport, I told him I made 2 bucks...he bought me a drink and I told me I was lucky not to come out at least three grand out of pocket. He said 90% of punters at Vegas lose in gambling just as much as they pay for hotels, food and entertainment.
I lost money in a dozen casinos. I was a whole $30 down by the end... (all slots)
Once you have $0.14 left you get the little cash out slip which I think is worth more as a momento.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
SNIP
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
SNIP
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
Didn't really work though did it? Osborne in particular seems like a man reborn.
No it didn't work, and in fact backfired on the sinister left-nationalists of Labour Leave by engendering sympathy for the Tories' Remainer wing among moderate europhile Labourites. Rentool's rabble have reaped what they have sewn in so many ways.
But then what do you expect from someone who boasted on here about pushing letters through people's doors telling they'd get £350m a week for the NHS, despite knowing that the bilge he was spreading was a bare-faced, flat lie?
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
I thought that Texas was the only state with a right to leave?
If memory serves, the Republic of Texas entered the Union with something in writing saying it could leave (or convert itself to up to four states) if it wanted. However, post-Civil War the legal status is that it just can't, tough titty.
In practical terms,however, if the people of Texas, California or Florida decided to break away to become independent, could the rest of the USA do much about it? A denial of selfdetermination would hardly look good to the rest of the world.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
SNIP
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
SNIP
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
Didn't really work though did it? Osborne in particular seems like a man reborn.
No it didn't work, and in fact backfired on the sinister left-nationalists of Labour Leave by engendering sympathy for the Tories' Remainer wing among moderate europhile Labourites. Rentool's rabble have reaped what they have sewn in so many ways.
But then what do you expect from someone who boasted on here about pushing letters through people's doors telling they'd get £350m a week for the NHS, despite knowing that the bilge he was spreading was a bare-faced, flat lie?
With a 5 year freeze on indexing benefits and Brexit inflation coming due to the Brexit devaluation it will be the very poorest who'll have the smile wiped off their faces. In my view using poor communities you never cared about to win for Leave is less problematic than using poor communities you did care about to win for Leave. Doubtless Sandy Rentool and Rochdale Pioneers will think the ESA claimant struggling to heat more than one room next winter or a family unable to replace a broken washing machine as well as feed the kids will be experiencing false consciousness. After all they will have taken back control.
There is a special place in Hell in my view , not for genuine 'Kippers , but for the voguish Lexiters. They should have and nearly all of them did know better but did it anyway.
Having seen the campaign unfold, and Trump's character flaws exposed, I've concluded that winding up Lefties is not sufficient reason to wish him to win. I've no liking for Clinton, but would sooner entrust her with the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. I've posted plenty of critical comments about Trump on this site.
My apologies. I have seen enough posts though of people who are all invariably right leaning, who have tried to draw equivalence between the two...and I have seen that for what is; namely Clinton haters who put their partisan feeling over and above the wider interests. That is where ideology is dangerous.
But fair play to you Sean....you haven't done that now.
I am massively partisan....but if you gave me the choice of Corbyn or May, or Corbyn or Hammond....I would go for the Tory. I know Corbyn would be utterly useless, and wouldn't even want to risk the fact that he could be PM.....
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
Because you've blown up our membership of the best trade deal on the planet. And in part you blew up that membership by appealing to the fantastical view there was a queue of better trade deals out there just waiting for us to leave the EU. So poor old May has to go to uber protectionist India and pretend that she's negotiating a trade deal and one that won't entail visa liberalisation. I'd still feel sorry for her if it wasn't for *that* conference speech. Nevertheless she wasn't responsible for the incoherent tissue of lies that was the Leave Campaign that's now decomposing like a Hallowe'en Pumpkin. She has to keep the balls in the air for as long as possible for the national good. I suppose a showy trip to another Anglosphere democracy is as harmless a way of doing that as any in the current circumstances.
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
Perhaps a post I read some time ago that you would love it if Trump wins to see the impact on the Guardianistas...or words to those effect.
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
It was also fucking idiotic.
I'm sure you find it hugely galling, but Labour Leave played a blinder. The best of any of the Referendum campaigns.
Florida: Right now, registered Democrats are ahead by about 7,200 votes. That pales in comparison to the roughly 146,000-voter edge they saw at this point in 2008. African-Americans were 16% of the early voting electorate that year, but they're only about 13% of the electorate so far in 2016. An overwhelming majority of black voters in Florida are registered with the Democratic Party.
I thought that Texas was the only state with a right to leave?
If memory serves, the Republic of Texas entered the Union with something in writing saying it could leave (or convert itself to up to four states) if it wanted. However, post-Civil War the legal status is that it just can't, tough titty.
In practical terms,however, if the people of Texas, California or Florida decided to break away to become independent, could the rest of the USA do much about it? A denial of selfdetermination would hardly look good to the rest of the world.
Florida and Texas did seceede in 1861. It didn't end well.
I thought that Texas was the only state with a right to leave?
If memory serves, the Republic of Texas entered the Union with something in writing saying it could leave (or convert itself to up to four states) if it wanted. However, post-Civil War the legal status is that it just can't, tough titty.
In practical terms,however, if the people of Texas, California or Florida decided to break away to become independent, could the rest of the USA do much about it? A denial of selfdetermination would hardly look good to the rest of the world.
Florida and Texas did seceede in 1861. It didn't end well.
But I don't recall either state being part of the Civil War!
Florida: Right now, registered Democrats are ahead by about 7,200 votes. That pales in comparison to the roughly 146,000-voter edge they saw at this point in 2008. African-Americans were 16% of the early voting electorate that year, but they're only about 13% of the electorate so far in 2016. An overwhelming majority of black voters in Florida are registered with the Democratic Party.
"Queen Offers To Restore British Rule Over United States
Addressing the American people from her office in Buckingham Palace, the Queen said that she was making the offer “in recognition of the desperate situation you now find yourselves in.” “This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said. The Queen urged Americans to write in her name on Election Day, after which the transition to British rule could begin “with a minimum of bother.”
Isn't there a two-year period of negotiation of transfer of power?
Does the US Constitution have an Article 50?
Actually there are strong legal arguments that no American state can secede from the United States. Once you join, you can never leave.
I thought that Texas was the only state with a right to leave?
Nope, it has the right to divide into multiple states within the United States
No, the original treaty between the US and Texas called for Texas to be annexed as territory which from which up to five states could be admitted. The treaty was rejected by the Senate and in the end Texas was admitted by Congressional joint resolution as a state. It has no more or less right to divide itself as any other state, and any such division would have to be approved by Congress.
The only percentage figure that matters is Jill Stein < 1%.
I am deeply worried this http://votecastr.us is going to let a bunch of west coast hippies vote Stein because the election is locked up for Clinton.
That will have no effect on the EC votes though
Exactly. People voting Stein as they don't need to vote Hillary to make sure she stop Trump. I don't care about EC, I'm on Jill Stein sub 1% vote share @ the ludicrous generous 4/1 Paddy is offering. I have a touch of insurance at 1%-2% but still lose £22.50 if that happens. Nightmare if it goes over 2%.
I want that conspiracy loon anti-vax-courting nutter to get 0%.
Florida: Right now, registered Democrats are ahead by about 7,200 votes. That pales in comparison to the roughly 146,000-voter edge they saw at this point in 2008. African-Americans were 16% of the early voting electorate that year, but they're only about 13% of the electorate so far in 2016. An overwhelming majority of black voters in Florida are registered with the Democratic Party.
Obama extended his lead on the day.
What I think we can say is that it's close.
I tell you...the amount of posts on pbCOM picking through early voting, ethnic breakdowns, bla, bla, bla.......you are like Shakespeares witches, looking at the tea leaves. I am non the wiser from all this early voting because everyone here has a different opinion and a different evidence source to back them up....
The only percentage figure that matters is Jill Stein < 1%.
I am deeply worried this http://votecastr.us is going to let a bunch of west coast hippies vote Stein because the election is locked up for Clinton.
That will have no effect on the EC votes though
Exactly. People voting Stein as they don't need to vote Hillary to make sure she stop Trump. I don't care about EC, I'm on Jill Stein sub 1% vote share @ the ludicrous generous 4/1 Paddy is offering. I have a touch of insurance at 1%-2% but still lose £22.50 if that happens. Nightmare if it goes over 2%.
I want that conspiracy loon anti-vax-courting nutter to get 0%.
Terrible headlines for May in tonight's Evening Standard. Gist is that Brexit requires a trade deal with India; India won't do one without increased immigration; ergo Brexit necessitates an increase in immigration. From India. Leave need to play this very carefully with the WCC. This isn't what they voted for at all. There will be cries of 'betrayal'.
Why do we require a trade deal with India?
SNIP
I wouldn't waste your breath Yellow......Sean wants Trump to win, so he's hardly going to be remotely persuaded by the nuances of your points.
Where do you get the impression I want Trump to win?
SNIP
However, the Labour Leave campaign message to vote Leave in order to 'wipe the smiles' from Cam and Ozzie's faces did help to persuade a tranche of Labourites to vote Leave.
Didn't really work though did it? Osborne in particular seems like a man reborn.
No it didn't work, and in fact backfired on the sinister left-nationalists of Labour Leave by engendering sympathy for the Tories' Remainer wing among moderate europhile Labourites. Rentool's rabble have reaped what they have sewn in so many ways.
But then what do you expect from someone who boasted on here about pushing letters through people's doors telling they'd get £350m a week for the NHS, despite knowing that the bilge he was spreading was a bare-faced, flat lie?
With a 5 year freeze on indexing benefits and Brexit inflation coming due to the Brexit devaluation it will be the very poorest who'll have the smile wiped off their faces. In my view using poor communities you never cared about to win for Leave is less problematic than using poor communities you did care about to win for Leave. Doubtless Sandy Rentool and Rochdale Pioneers will think the ESA claimant struggling to heat more than one room next winter or a family unable to replace a broken washing machine as well as feed the kids will be experiencing false consciousness. After all they will have taken back control.
There is a special place in Hell in my view , not for genuine 'Kippers , but for the voguish Lexiters. They should have and nearly all of them did know better but did it anyway.
My apologies. I have seen enough posts though of people who are all invariably right leaning, who have tried to draw equivalence between the two...and I have seen that for what is; namely Clinton haters who put their partisan feeling over and above the wider interests. That is where ideology is dangerous.
But fair play to you Sean....you haven't done that now.
I am massively partisan....but if you gave me the choice of Corbyn or May, or Corbyn or Hammond....I would go for the Tory. I know Corbyn would be utterly useless, and wouldn't even want to risk the fact that he could be PM.....
There is no equivalence at all in my mind. I detest Clinton and pretty much all that she stands for in terms of elitist arrogance. But I would campaign for her and vote for her in a heartbeat as long as her opponent is Trump. I am not given to hyperbole when it comes to individuals but I do believe he is genuinely dangerous both for the US and the rest of the world.
Comments
The growth - sometimes pretty spectacular - is elsewhere.
Reducing our import obsession is as important as expanding exports.
In Pennsylvania the exit poll was Dem 52.16%, Rep 46.84% and the result was Dem 51.97%, Rep 46.59%.
Might be a good way to work out what is going on if so..
This stuff is tricky. Why can't she treat us - the Indians, her EU partners and the people of Britain as grown ups?
wait for it....
Nicolas Sarkozy.
If we're getting a real boost in turnout, it's going to be a landslide, just not sure which way at the moment
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/795694782387486720?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=interlagos+brazil
Population, Florida, 2016: 20m.
2016 – 6,424,595 of 20,000,000 = 32.1%
2000 - 5,861,223 of 16,000,000 = 36.6%
those are in pounds, not thousands...
About 8.3m votes last time.
Ana Navarro – Verified account @ananavarro
FL is too close for me to cast a symbolic protest vote. I voted AGAINST Trump, and FOR Hillary. Here I explain why: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/opinions/navarro-republican-voting-for-clinton/index.html …
http://www.nytimes.com
+2 62-66
+86 58-62
+4 54-57
-102 54-
It pissed me off at the time because I couldn't understand the mentality that you would rather someone with the pathological issues as Trump to become POTUs just to annoy people like me...
It would be like me saying I wish Stalin had invaded the UK just to see the faces of the Tories...ho, ho, ho...Very funny....
How is PM Ed doing in EU Britain ?
1/after a fascinating four days in US it's great to be back home - and have the chance to reflect on our constitutional debate
2/ The first thing to note is that judicial independence is critical to the rule of law and any proper democracy
3/the high court judges who've ruled on Article 50 are brilliant, thoughtful, wise and decent men - their judgment deserves respect
4/ Good people can differ on their reasoning and conclusion - but I find much of it persuasive
5/ however, even if I didn't agree with elements of their reasoning I'd personally treat the judgement of 3 brilliant men with respect
6/BUT the freedom of the press is also important- some of us may object to judgements - others to headlines - but let's remember Voltaire
7/a raucous, vigorous, press is just as much a guarantor of freedom as our independent judiciary - we are the land of Wilkes and Edward Coke
I see strictly they have Trump winning Nevada and Clinton Iowa. And a shock Dem gain in Georgia.
Someone said earlier today 900,000 whites, 500,000 Hispanics. But of course %ge wise the increase in Hispanics >> increase in whites.
Once you have $0.14 left you get the little cash out slip which I think is worth more as a momento.
54-58% -1
58-62% +551
62-66% -3
>66% -411
Personally I still see the 58-62% band as value.
There are some people that die...and you are simply amazed that were still breathing in the first place.
But then what do you expect from someone who boasted on here about pushing letters through people's doors telling they'd get £350m a week for the NHS, despite knowing that the bilge he was spreading was a bare-faced, flat lie?
http://us.cnn.com/2016/11/07/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-ads-legal-warning-election-2016/index.html
Morbid, I know, but it is an interesting list of lots of famous people who aren't (yet) dead and you might have thought they were.
There is a special place in Hell in my view , not for genuine 'Kippers , but for the voguish Lexiters. They should have and nearly all of them did know better but did it anyway.
Having seen the campaign unfold, and Trump's character flaws exposed, I've concluded that winding up Lefties is not sufficient reason to wish him to win. I've no liking for Clinton, but would sooner entrust her with the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. I've posted plenty of critical comments about Trump on this site.
@seanFear
My apologies. I have seen enough posts though of people who are all invariably right leaning, who have tried to draw equivalence between the two...and I have seen that for what is; namely Clinton haters who put their partisan feeling over and above the wider interests. That is where ideology is dangerous.
But fair play to you Sean....you haven't done that now.
I am massively partisan....but if you gave me the choice of Corbyn or May, or Corbyn or Hammond....I would go for the Tory. I know Corbyn would be utterly useless, and wouldn't even want to risk the fact that he could be PM.....
And ultimately, decisive.
Right now, registered Democrats are ahead by about 7,200 votes. That pales in comparison to the roughly 146,000-voter edge they saw at this point in 2008. African-Americans were 16% of the early voting electorate that year, but they're only about 13% of the electorate so far in 2016. An overwhelming majority of black voters in Florida are registered with the Democratic Party.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/07/politics/north-carolina-early-voting-2016/index.html
And this is CNN
Teehee! The wicked witch of the south is shrivelling in the winds of autumn.
I am deeply worried this http://votecastr.us is going to let a bunch of west coast hippies vote Stein because the election is locked up for Clinton.
What I think we can say is that it's close.
McDowell, Henderson too (West)
(Southeast)
I want that conspiracy loon anti-vax-courting nutter to get 0%.
Next you'll be getting overexcited by a poll in Arizona showing Trump winning by 5