Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
But his share is less than Romney.
Due to traditional voters in safe Dem/GOP seats going for Johnson, IMO. Trump will win the popular vote quite easily in 2020 if he runs.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
But his share is less than Romney.
Due to traditional voters in safe Dem/GOP seats going for Johnson, IMO. Trump will win the popular vote quite easily in 2020 if he runs.
That kind of depends on how well he does.
Of course, but I don't think he will be a disaster. Just middling.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Obama deported 2.5 million people, so Trump deporting 3 million is a big deal, why?
How screwed up is politics in the US, where the concept of deporting illegals is even seen as an issue?
If one overstays their welcome or misbehaves in any country they can be expected to be put on a plane back home, no?
Isn't it clouded a bit in the US by the fact that anyone born on US soil is automatically a US citizen? It means there are a lot of kids who are legal and a lot of parents who are illegal. If you deport the parents you deprive US citizens of a natural right and increase your own cost-base.
It can be clouded like that, but there does seem a very strong element within the Democratic Party that is opposed to the very concept of enforcing immigration controls, or distinguishing between legal and illegal immigrants.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks.
It was May's worst performance as PM. There is vast room for improvement, however, Corbyn has probably peaked in terms of his performance at the dispatch box. No matter what the future holds, I wonder if May will come to regret not calling an early election. It would have been done and dusted by now, and the Tories would have won by a landslide. They may still well do that anyway, but I just sense a golden opportunity might have been missed.
The reality for Labour is that they are not a government in waiting, and do not have a PM in waiting. The Tories really are very fortunate on both of those fronts. When Brown imploded, the Tories were both of those things after 13 long years of opposition.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks. May and the Tories are lucky that Labour are not anywhere near a government in waiting, with a charismatic and popular leader, otherwise they could be in real trouble. Imagine a young Tony Blair at the dispatch box instead of Corbyn.
Incredible, also, that not a single MP had the courage to congratulate Trump's presidency. They may find him deeply objectionable, however, there are greater things at stake than tribal instincts and personal feelings - like trade deals and economic growth.
I think that she is juggling so many issues at present that it is taking an enormous effort to keep on top of her brief.
I do expect we will see a very different TM once the Supreme Court has ruled, probably in January, and irrespective of their decision, this will provide the basis for her to come forward with an actual agenda and timetable for leaving the EU.
She is treading water at present but I would expect her to become very assertive at that time.
As far as leave is concerned she is the best hope as the forces against her from the remain camp are extensive and as in the referendum itself, the broadcast media including Sky and the BBC are following an unashamedly anti Brexit agenda, none more so than Faisal Islam of Sky
Interested in more about eddy current brakes, these are what rollercoasters use for 2g or 3g stops, which would be damn uncomfortable in a tram but way better than a crash. If the Croydon trams have them, why are they not used as emergency brakes before these tight corners?
I've just done some 'research# (i.e. Googled) and I was wrong: they're magnetic brakes, but not eddy brakes:
The third braking system is the magnetic 'track brakes' system for emergencies, basically a 'shoe', each side of each bogie, each apply 6.66 tons of pressure onto the track and stops the tram very fast indeed, the shoes are assisted by applying sand onto the track to aid grip. This is sometimes known as the 'Hazard Brake' and all uses have to be reported to Controllers and logged.
As for why they're not automatically used: this is the first fatal crash on a UK tram system for many decades (as opposed to collisions with trams) - albeit there were virtually no trams for much of that time. They were probably thought 'safe' without them.
Another good link. So it appears that emergency brakes are there, but are unlike to have been used in the accident sequence under discussion, looking at the speeds involved.
As you say, first serious accident on a UK tram for a long time. I'd expect a significant list of recommendations from the RAIB on this one.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'd recommend reading the article from Sean Trende that I linked to. Many Hispanic voters are not at all interested in/actively hostile to amnesties for illegal immigrants, and by historical standards, Trump did not perform at all badly among them.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Texas moved from a 16% difference between Romney and Obama in 2012 to less than 10% this year. It is going to become a battleground state in either 2020 or 2024.
Michigan: automatic recount is only if the margin is less than 2,000 votes. But a candidate can request one if it's larger.
I can't find a definite original source for the 11k margin, alot of CNN's numbers are out the other way - Arizona not updated for ages.
It seems once they know who the president they don't particularly give a monkeys anymore.
Dave Wasserman's spreadsheet will be reliable.
Interesting that not only isn't there a national website with the popular vote data, there are also some states which don't bother to give the total, for example Illinois. You have to look at the websites for the individual counties and then add them up. That might be the case in Michigan as well.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Texas moved from a 16% difference between Romney and Obama in 2012 to less than 10% this year. It is going to become a battleground state in either 2020 or 2024.
Shouldn't you be comparing the swing in the state to the national swing? It's over performing, but that does make it look even better.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks.
It was May's worst performance as PM. There is vast room for improvement, however, Corbyn has probably peaked in terms of his performance at the dispatch box. No matter what the future holds, I wonder if May will come to regret not calling an early election. It would have been done and dusted by now, and the Tories would have won by a landslide. They may still well do that anyway, but I just sense a golden opportunity might have been missed.
The reality for Labour is that they are not a government in waiting, and do not have a PM in waiting. The Tories really are very fortunate on both of those fronts. When Brown imploded, the Tories were both of those things after 13 long years of opposition.
In May's defence, Dave made look PMQs look effortless because he had been doing it for nearly eleven years.
There is an argument that the best PMQs performers are the ones that have done the hard yards as Leader of the Opposition then become PM, because they know what to expect.
I note Jez has become a lot better at PMQs since he took my advice
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
The PM has made it clear that the planning is going on now (thanks Mr Cameron) and she will be in a position to start the negotiations with the EU early next year.
That she's understandably not going to give weekly updates on CS planning, and doesn't fancy the idea of going into the negotiations with one hand tied behind her back, doesn't mean she's doing a bad job.
The Remain-loving media are going to have to work to the government's timetable on this one, not the other way around. There will be plenty of time for both the media and Parliament to get involved, once the discussions are underway next year.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Texas moved from a 16% difference between Romney and Obama in 2012 to less than 10% this year. It is going to become a battleground state in either 2020 or 2024.
Broadly speaking, gains and losses for Republicans and Democrats are cancelling each other out.
Twenty years ago, Bill Clinton carried Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virginia, none of which are remotely close now.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The PM has made it clear that the planning is going on now (thanks Mr Cameron) and she will be in a position to start the negotiations with the EU early next year.
That she's understandably not going to give weekly updates on CS planning, and doesn't fancy the idea of going into the negotiations with one hand tied behind her back, doesn't mean she's doing a bad job.
The Remain-loving media are going to have to work to the government's timetable on this one, not the other way around. There will be plenty of time for both the media and Parliament to get involved, once the discussions are underway next year.
Broadly speaking, Theresa May's position is a strong one. 54% approve of her performance as PM, including 87% of Conservatives.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks. May and the Tories are lucky that Labour are not anywhere near a government in waiting, with a charismatic and popular leader, otherwise they could be in real trouble. Imagine a young Tony Blair at the dispatch box instead of Corbyn.
Incredible, also, that not a single MP had the courage to congratulate Trump's presidency. They may find him deeply objectionable, however, there are greater things at stake than tribal instincts and personal feelings - like trade deals and economic growth.
I think that she is juggling so many issues at present that it is taking an enormous effort to keep on top of her brief.
Juggling, or as the man from Deloitte Monte said, pulling in decisions instead of delegating.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks. May and the Tories are lucky that Labour are not anywhere near a government in waiting, with a charismatic and popular leader, otherwise they could be in real trouble. Imagine a young Tony Blair at the dispatch box instead of Corbyn.
Incredible, also, that not a single MP had the courage to congratulate Trump's presidency. They may find him deeply objectionable, however, there are greater things at stake than tribal instincts and personal feelings - like trade deals and economic growth.
I think that she is juggling so many issues at present that it is taking an enormous effort to keep on top of her brief.
Juggling, or as the man from Deloitte Monte said, pulling in decisions instead of delegating.
Not sure how they could say that without access to the very meetings they were supposedly talking about.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks.
It was May's worst performance as PM. There is vast room for improvement, however, Corbyn has probably peaked in terms of his performance at the dispatch box. No matter what the future holds, I wonder if May will come to regret not calling an early election. It would have been done and dusted by now, and the Tories would have won by a landslide. They may still well do that anyway, but I just sense a golden opportunity might have been missed.
The reality for Labour is that they are not a government in waiting, and do not have a PM in waiting. The Tories really are very fortunate on both of those fronts. When Brown imploded, the Tories were both of those things after 13 long years of opposition.
In May's defence, Dave made look PMQs look effortless because he had been doing it for nearly eleven years.
There is an argument that the best PMQs performers are the ones that have done the hard yards as Leader of the Opposition then become PM, because they know what to expect.
I note Jez has become a lot better at PMQs since he took my advice
That is true, but Cameron was a natural orator and performer long before he became LoTo. So was Tony Blair. Here's one to ponder over. Corbyn continues his relative improvement at PMQs, Labour back benchers become less vocal in their opposition to him, but deep in their hearts know the British public will never vote fro him at a general election. What do they do? Undermine him when he is apparently improving, at least at PMQs, or keep quiet in the hope that he reverts back to his old self? I guess next year's council elections will tell us something.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
But now the Dems will have to contend with much, much slower Hispanic population growth than before plus Trump being seen as more acceptable to traditional GOP voters. If Clinton had won and naturalised the 11m illegal immigrants, many of whom are in Texas, then I think Texas would have been very marginal, now it won't be, if anything I think 2020 will see a swing back to the GOP if Trump isn't rubbish or he ends up being primaried for a traditionalist GOPer.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Texas moved from a 16% difference between Romney and Obama in 2012 to less than 10% this year. It is going to become a battleground state in either 2020 or 2024.
Broadly speaking, gains and losses for Republicans and Democrats are cancelling each other out.
Twenty years ago, Bill Clinton carried Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virginia, none of which are remotely close now.
Clinton specifically did well in the south because he was a southerner, ditto (I think) Jimmy Carter. Not sure if it has been a happy hunting ground for non-southern Democrats since Kennedy.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
But now the Dems will have to contend with much, much slower Hispanic population growth than before plus Trump being seen as more acceptable to traditional GOP voters. If Clinton had won and naturalised the 11m illegal immigrants, many of whom are in Texas, then I think Texas would have been very marginal, now it won't be, if anything I think 2020 will see a swing back to the GOP if Trump isn't rubbish or he ends up being primaried for a traditionalist GOPer.
Reversion to AA mean in the rust belt is a far more pressing Democrat demographic issue.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
I would pitch the LibDems lower than that at 9/10% simply because they now have so much competition as the NOTA option.Many who in the past would have supported them on that basis will now opt for the Greens or UKIP.
I think you are running about two years behind the times, Mr Justin.
+1
Why be Green when you can love Corbyn, and why be UKIP when it's 'job done' and both Banks and Farage are about to take their energies and £ elsewhere?
The point is that in the past many people voted LibDem - or Liberal - despite not supporting their policy agendas at all. Many were anti - EU and quite a few had racist views more likely to be associated with the BNP.They voted LibDem simply out of a wish to reject both Tories and Labour.Today they continue to be beneficiaries of such votes - but have much more competition.
An interesting point, Mr Justin. I suppose that, in the same spirit, you would argue that very many people voted Conservative at the last election because they wanted the Coalition Government to continue. And many more did so because they liked that charming Mr Cameron and the utterly astounding Mr Osborne. (The fall in the Tory majority at Witney from 25.000 to only 5000 might support this point.)
I'm sure that a lot of people vote against a Party rather than for another (e.g. 2015, Vote Tory because don't like Labour or SNP). Simple solution -Single Transferable Vote.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
But Texas has not always been a dead cert for the Republicans. Despite losing the national election Hubert Humphrey won it in 1968 - as did Carter in 1976.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
But now the Dems will have to contend with much, much slower Hispanic population growth than before plus Trump being seen as more acceptable to traditional GOP voters. If Clinton had won and naturalised the 11m illegal immigrants, many of whom are in Texas, then I think Texas would have been very marginal, now it won't be, if anything I think 2020 will see a swing back to the GOP if Trump isn't rubbish or he ends up being primaried for a traditionalist GOPer.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
But now the Dems will have to contend with much, much slower Hispanic population growth than before plus Trump being seen as more acceptable to traditional GOP voters. If Clinton had won and naturalised the 11m illegal immigrants, many of whom are in Texas, then I think Texas would have been very marginal, now it won't be, if anything I think 2020 will see a swing back to the GOP if Trump isn't rubbish or he ends up being primaried for a traditionalist GOPer.
I don't think you can attribute the growth in the Hispanic population in Texas as being primarily driven by illegals. As that article makes clear, Hispanics are moving to Texas from other parts of the US and they also have bigger families. Most of them are in Texas legally. Anyway, we will see.
Reversion to AA mean in the rust belt is a far more pressing Democrat demographic issue.
Yes, getting AA voters out is going to be very important for the Dems in 2020, especially if Trump does manage to bring jobs back to the rust belt and manages to invest his $1tn in dying infrastructure, both moves would disproportionately help black Americans in the rust belt.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
New Hampshire was a reliable Republican state until Clinton won there in 1992. It also handed Bush the White House in 2000!
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
New Hampshire was a reliable Republican state until Clinton won there in 1992. It also handed Bush the White House in 2000!
I don't think you can attribute the growth in the Hispanic population in Texas as being primarily driven by illegals. As that article makes clear, Hispanics are moving to Texas from other parts of the US and they also have bigger families. Most of them are in Texas legally. Anyway, we will see.
If that's the case then NV and AZ become safe GOP without the amnesty. Either way it's hard to see how how the Dems will continue to benefit from demographics in the border states without 11m new Hispanic voters who will break 90/10 against the GOP.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
But now the Dems will have to contend with much, much slower Hispanic population growth than before plus Trump being seen as more acceptable to traditional GOP voters. If Clinton had won and naturalised the 11m illegal immigrants, many of whom are in Texas, then I think Texas would have been very marginal, now it won't be, if anything I think 2020 will see a swing back to the GOP if Trump isn't rubbish or he ends up being primaried for a traditionalist GOPer.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Like! That's not an impossibility either, if the GOP establishment cant get on with Trump but he remains popular in the country. Result: landslide for the Dems like Reagan got in '84.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
Interesting. The Dems seem to have won a number of R+1 and R+2 seats, indicating they did better in the House than an even contest, so more in line with the popular vote.
Not really - the GOP won 7 "against the head" (3x D+1, 2x D+2, 2x D+5) and the Dems won 8 (4x R+1, 1x R+2, 2x R+4, 1x R+6). The 10 EVENs split 5-5.
Well done to Amazon. Using it's advertising spend for a serious message and one many folk will find quite challenging in Brexit Britain. Amazon TV ad features imam and vicar exchanging gifts
Blimey, Trump really has allowed the racists to come out from under their rocks. Or do we class this as bitchy too?
twitter.com/NBCNews/status/798310841921761280
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
Yeah, I don't think anyone on here would ascribe to that view!
Reversion to AA mean in the rust belt is a far more pressing Democrat demographic issue.
Yes, getting AA voters out is going to be very important for the Dems in 2020, especially if Trump does manage to bring jobs back to the rust belt and manages to invest his $1tn in dying infrastructure, both moves would disproportionately help black Americans in the rust belt.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
The margin between victory and defeat is tiny. Had Clinton edged Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and the Democrats got to 50 Senate seats, all the talk would be of a permanent liberal majority, even if there were only a few thousand votes in it.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
New Hampshire was a reliable Republican state until Clinton won there in 1992. It also handed Bush the White House in 2000!
Reversion to AA mean in the rust belt is a far more pressing Democrat demographic issue.
Yes, getting AA voters out is going to be very important for the Dems in 2020, especially if Trump does manage to bring jobs back to the rust belt and manages to invest his $1tn in dying infrastructure, both moves would disproportionately help black Americans in the rust belt.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
The voting pattern of New Hampshire is fantastically higgledy piggldy. Most states are like "Theres your GOP countryside, and your big Dem city". New Hampshire is one where it looks like people just flip a coin.
After watching PMQs today, I have to say this as a Tory supporter, I was disappointed with May. She seems oddly uncomfortable at the dispatch box, at times overtly nervous (similar to Gordon Brown), and even somebody as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn has appeared vaguely competent in recent weeks. May and the Tories are lucky that Labour are not anywhere near a government in waiting, with a charismatic and popular leader, otherwise they could be in real trouble. Imagine a young Tony Blair at the dispatch box instead of Corbyn.
Incredible, also, that not a single MP had the courage to congratulate Trump's presidency. They may find him deeply objectionable, however, there are greater things at stake than tribal instincts and personal feelings - like trade deals and economic growth.
I think that she is juggling so many issues at present that it is taking an enormous effort to keep on top of her brief.
Juggling, or as the man from Deloitte Monte said, pulling in decisions instead of delegating.
She will want control over Brexit as she is the one who has the most to win or lose - other matters can be delegated
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
Blimey, Trump really has allowed the racists to come out from under their rocks. Or do we class this as bitchy too?
twitter.com/NBCNews/status/798310841921761280
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
Yeah, I don't think anyone on here would ascribe to that view!
Yesterday someone on here said the Michelle Obama ape comment was just bitchiness
A worker own business embedding a coalition of very localist British environmental charities in it's Christmas advertising. The green left needs to embrace oikophillia after Trexit. 'Secrecy was vital': how our charity helped John Lewis make its Christmas ad
Blimey, Trump really has allowed the racists to come out from under their rocks. Or do we class this as bitchy too?
twitter.com/NBCNews/status/798310841921761280
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
Yeah, I don't think anyone on here would ascribe to that view!
Yesterday someone on here said the Michelle Obama ape comment was just bitchiness
I don't think we ever heard back from them on it.. I am hoping they were speaking generally about rudeness to people (ad hominem attacks was mentioned in the same sentence). But yeah, if they were referring to that specific case that is bad.
Reversion to AA mean in the rust belt is a far more pressing Democrat demographic issue.
Yes, getting AA voters out is going to be very important for the Dems in 2020, especially if Trump does manage to bring jobs back to the rust belt and manages to invest his $1tn in dying infrastructure, both moves would disproportionately help black Americans in the rust belt.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
The margin between victory and defeat is tiny. Had Clinton edged Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and the Democrats got to 50 Senate seats, all the talk would be of a permanent liberal majority, even if there were only a few thousand votes in it.
Yes, I think so, and with Clinton promising 11m new Hispanic voters for the border states it might have been true as well. Reversing that demographic creep for the Dems is going to change the nature of politics in the US. Especially since it looks like Hispanics didn't all break for Clinton as was being predicted. As the article above pointed out, legal migrants are much closer to the "American" voter than "Hispanic" voter, it is amnesty migrants who break heavily for the Dems.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
Well three of the six police officers involved were white.
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
Well done to Amazon. Using it's advertising spend for a serious message and one many folk will find quite challenging in Brexit Britain. Amazon TV ad features imam and vicar exchanging gifts
Why would many find it challenging. Some will but I think it is exactly the message we need right now. Endorsing leaving the EU does not mean that you do not support a multicultural society.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
In the debate when they were asked what was the most important issue facing America - Hillary said Climate Change, Trump said Jobs for Americans.
That answer alone explains the backlash, along with the meaningless discussions about safe spaces and transgendered bathrooms which appear to have dominated the 'liberals' for the past year.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
When every white person gets branded a racist, it's much easier to be a racist.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
She cannot call one but she can force one by using the Tory majority to deliberately lose a vote of no confidence and then voting down any alternatives.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
When every white person gets branded a racist, it's much easier to be a racist.
It's always a choice. Like Steve Bannon, President-elect Trump's senior adviser and strategist, you can think there are too many Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley or you can think it does not matter.
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
How many first term incumbents are Labour, and how many are Tory?
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
How many first term incumbents are Labour, and how many are Tory?
I think Justin's point is that a Tory majority of 34 relies on Tory gains, not Labour ones.
However it is really a summing up of the dire situation fo the Labour party that they will be on the defensive for a third straight election. It was really noticeable in 2015, as the results came in: Tory holds taken for granted, the Tories pushing for Labour marginal seats.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
When every white person gets branded a racist, it's much easier to be a racist.
It's always a choice. Like Steve Bannon, President-elect Trump's senior adviser and strategist, you can think there are too many Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley or you can think it does not matter.
Let me don my flame suit right now.. but if it's demographically correct (a big if), is that any different from saying there are too many male CEOs in Silicon Valley?
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Tory and UKIP combined below 50% for the first time in a while. The start of something or just churn?
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
When every white person gets branded a racist, it's much easier to be a racist.
It's always a choice. Like Steve Bannon, President-elect Trump's senior adviser and strategist, you can think there are too many Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley or you can think it does not matter.
It's the wrong choice. A bad sign for those of us who hope Trump won't be so bad, but only a sign. What more can we do about it? Trump has won, like him or not, this nation has to deal with 4 or 8 years of President Trump.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
Which stopped at precisely midnight on US Election Day - obviously when his or her contract finished, having pointlesslessly spent six weeks spamming a site full of people who couldn't vote!
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
She cannot call one but she can force one by using the Tory majority to deliberately lose a vote of no confidence and then voting down any alternatives.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
Surely somebody would be invited to 'try' to form a Government which would then need an affirmative Confidence Vote in the Commons.Some argue that would be someone other than May - who had just lost a No Confidence Vote. Effectively a new Government would be formed awaiting affirmation by the Legislature. For an Affirmation Vote to take place there would have to be a Government in existence to vote for or against!
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Tory and UKIP combined below 50% for the first time in a while. The start of something or just churn?
Brexit is now government policy and a Tory government policy to boot. I expect that to feed into perceptions long term though not in time to impact on A50.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
I enjoyed 619 - so would anyone who believed in receiving information trolling in homeopathic doses.
I wonder whether he dodged a bullet - or an I-phone.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
When every white person gets branded a racist, it's much easier to be a racist.
It's always a choice. Like Steve Bannon, President-elect Trump's senior adviser and strategist, you can think there are too many Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley or you can think it does not matter.
Let me don my flame suit right now.. but if it's demographically correct (a big if), is that any different from saying there are too many male CEOs in Silicon Valley?
Potentially, if Asians are under-represented in CEOs/higher earners as a whole.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
The margin between victory and defeat is tiny. Had Clinton edged Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and the Democrats got to 50 Senate seats, all the talk would be of a permanent liberal majority, even if there were only a few thousand votes in it.
The dream scenario for the Dems is if the GOP deselect Trump and he runs as an independent.
Which is why Trump would have to fuck up monumentally for the GOP to primary him, or, in the traditionalist dream scenario, impeach him and have Pence run on the same basis.
The margin between victory and defeat is tiny. Had Clinton edged Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and the Democrats got to 50 Senate seats, all the talk would be of a permanent liberal majority, even if there were only a few thousand votes in it.
Yes, I think so, and with Clinton promising 11m new Hispanic voters for the border states it might have been true as well. Reversing that demographic creep for the Dems is going to change the nature of politics in the US. Especially since it looks like Hispanics didn't all break for Clinton as was being predicted. As the article above pointed out, legal migrants are much closer to the "American" voter than "Hispanic" voter, it is amnesty migrants who break heavily for the Dems.
The article also drew attention to another thing you've alluded to in the past.
When you view your defeated political opponents in the same light as the Germans and Japanese after WWII, don't be surprised if they view you the same way when the political cycle turns.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
No it's just an inane form of mud throwing. As it would be if I posted tweets about the "Rape Melania" story, or the threats from the PacketSled CEO, or the guy from BNP Paribas, or the GrubHub CEO, or the journalist who sometimes writes for the Guardian. And those threats and abuse are just the tip of the iceberg.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
She cannot call one but she can force one by using the Tory majority to deliberately lose a vote of no confidence and then voting down any alternatives.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
Surely somebody would be invited to 'try' to form a Government which would then need an affirmative Confidence Vote in the Commons.Some argue that would be someone other than May - who had just lost a No Confidence Vote. Effectively a new Government would be formed awaiting affirmation by the Legislature. For an Affirmation Vote to take place there would have to be a Government in existence to vote for or against!
The FTPA is very vague, all it says is
An early parliamentary general election is also to take place if—
(a)the House of Commons passes a motion in the form set out in subsection (4) [“That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”], and
(b)the period of 14 days after the day on which that motion is passed ends without the House passing a motion in the form set out in subsection (5) [“That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”].
It could be the same government seeking confidence.
Comments
President-elect Donald Trump’s daughter, Tiffany Trump most searched person on Pornhub followed by his wife, Melania
http://www.techworm.net/2016/11/donald-trumps-daughter-tiffany-trump-latest-hit-pornhub.html
As usual, this article from Sean Trende on US politics is a must-read.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Half of Brits think the Government is mishandling Brexit, poll finds
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/half-of-brits-think-the-government-is-mishandling-brexit-poll-finds-a3396961.html
And fair enough.. not saying anything about it doesn't help!
Ahem.
The reality for Labour is that they are not a government in waiting, and do not have a PM in waiting. The Tories really are very fortunate on both of those fronts. When Brown imploded, the Tories were both of those things after 13 long years of opposition.
I do expect we will see a very different TM once the Supreme Court has ruled, probably in January, and irrespective of their decision, this will provide the basis for her to come forward with an actual agenda and timetable for leaving the EU.
She is treading water at present but I would expect her to become very assertive at that time.
As far as leave is concerned she is the best hope as the forces against her from the remain camp are extensive and as in the referendum itself, the broadcast media including Sky and the BBC are following an unashamedly anti Brexit agenda, none more so than Faisal Islam of Sky
As you say, first serious accident on a UK tram for a long time. I'd expect a significant list of recommendations from the RAIB on this one.
Interesting that not only isn't there a national website with the popular vote data, there are also some states which don't bother to give the total, for example Illinois. You have to look at the websites for the individual counties and then add them up. That might be the case in Michigan as well.
There is an argument that the best PMQs performers are the ones that have done the hard yards as Leader of the Opposition then become PM, because they know what to expect.
I note Jez has become a lot better at PMQs since he took my advice
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/09/07/if-corbyn-wants-to-win-the-confidence-of-labour-mps-he-needs-to-improve-his-performance-in-the-commons/
That she's understandably not going to give weekly updates on CS planning, and doesn't fancy the idea of going into the negotiations with one hand tied behind her back, doesn't mean she's doing a bad job.
The Remain-loving media are going to have to work to the government's timetable on this one, not the other way around. There will be plenty of time for both the media and Parliament to get involved, once the discussions are underway next year.
This is an extremely complex subject and I am waiting, as I have already mentioned, to see how this pans out in the new year.
She is the best hope to find the middle way unless someone can suggest anyone who would do better.
Twenty years ago, Bill Clinton carried Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virginia, none of which are remotely close now.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/explainer/article/Texas-population-growth-explained-7865877.php
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Ben
Labour will not appoint Shadow Immigration Minister.
https://t.co/f9O9Z1Yh1W https://t.co/KC9GCHNkxI
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/798310841921761280
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37997640
http://www.270towin.com/states/New_Hampshire
Amazon TV ad features imam and vicar exchanging gifts
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/16/amazon-tv-ad-imam-vicar-exchanging-gifts?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
'Secrecy was vital': how our charity helped John Lewis make its Christmas ad
https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2016/nov/16/secrecy-wildlife-trusts-john-lewis-christmas-ad?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Thankfully, it's up for review in 2020.
Are you perhaps thinking about the Fixed Term Parliament Act?
That answer alone explains the backlash, along with the meaningless discussions about safe spaces and transgendered bathrooms which appear to have dominated the 'liberals' for the past year.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Theresa May dreams of having Jeremy Corbyn refuse to allow her to go to the polls. Just think of it: an enemy of democracy.
However it is really a summing up of the dire situation fo the Labour party that they will be on the defensive for a third straight election. It was really noticeable in 2015, as the results came in: Tory holds taken for granted, the Tories pushing for Labour marginal seats.
I find the way Hillary's weak AA vote is skirted over quite interesting.
After all, we are talking about people who didn;t turn out for Hillary because she is white.
informationtrolling in homeopathic doses.I wonder whether he dodged a bullet - or an I-phone.
When you view your defeated political opponents in the same light as the Germans and Japanese after WWII, don't be surprised if they view you the same way when the political cycle turns.
If the numbers were taken after Trump's win, there could be a 'not in my name' effect?
An early parliamentary general election is also to take place if—
(a)the House of Commons passes a motion in the form set out in subsection (4) [“That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”], and
(b)the period of 14 days after the day on which that motion is passed ends without the House passing a motion in the form set out in subsection (5) [“That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”].
It could be the same government seeking confidence.