Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If LAB was really concerned about Corbyn’s 2014 Tunisia covera

124»

Comments

  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that neither of Maine's Senators are Democrats.

    Isn't there a whole libertarian, pioneer culture in that far north east corner of the USA (likewise in parts of Quebec, Nova Scotia etc). Lots of gun ownership. Individualism.
    New Hampshire is the 'live free or die' state, Quebec though is more social democratic
    Quebec is complex, I think. I've only been to Montreal which is fairly liberal (tho surprisingly religious), but parts of Quebec are very right wing, as I understand it. A mix of pioneer spirit and French exceptionalism.
    We once went to Quebec on a coach tour from New York visiting Boston, Montreal, Toronto, Washington etc and back to New York

    We were an international group but many were Americans. We were all booked into a French restaurant in Quebec which would only converse in French. Fortunately my wife and I can speak a little French and were able to order our meals and drinks and were warmly welcomed.

    As for the Americans they refused point blank to even attempt to communicate with the staff and were promptly shown the door. It was really funny
    Quebec is basically a bit of France which has plonked itself in North America much to some Americans shock when they visit I imagine and obviously more Brits have visited France as a percentage than Americans
    Most Americans do not travel far. On our last cruise one American called her husband to come and look at all the ducks as we sailed along passing lots of seagulls. It was so funny at the time

    Another American commented why did they build Windsor Castle under the Heathrow flight path.
    Just been on a work jolly conference with most of my NYC colleagues to Old Windsor. To be fair, they’re way to savvy for the flightpath thing, but we did do a post-work river cruise towards Windsor proper and some were “look at the quaint houses by the river” and asked me if they were very old and I had to say I doubted any were more than a century old.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,751
    RobD said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that neither of Maine's Senators are Democrats.

    Isn't there a whole libertarian, pioneer culture in that far north east corner of the USA (likewise in parts of Quebec, Nova Scotia etc). Lots of gun ownership. Individualism.
    New Hampshire is the 'live free or die' state, Quebec though is more social democratic
    Quebec is complex, I think. I've only been to Montreal which is fairly liberal (tho surprisingly religious), but parts of Quebec are very right wing, as I understand it. A mix of pioneer spirit and French exceptionalism.
    We once went to Quebec on a coach tour from New York visiting Boston, Montreal, Toronto, Washington etc and back to New York

    We were an international group but many were Americans. We were all booked into a French restaurant in Quebec which would only converse in French. Fortunately my wife and I can speak a little French and were able to order our meals and drinks and were warmly welcomed.

    As for the Americans they refused point blank to even attempt to communicate with the staff and were promptly shown the door. It was really funny
    Quebec is basically a bit of France which has plonked itself in North America much to some Americans shock when they visit I imagine and obviously more Brits have visited France as a percentage than Americans
    I'm in Montreal right now - seemingly a high density of cathedrals and gyms.

    The French bit of North America used to be very big of course:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_France
    The Louisiana Purchase was one of the greatest unforced errors in geopolitical history. Akin to the German declaration of war on America, or the sale of Alaska by Russia, or Britain joining World War One for no reason, or maybe Brex - no, only joking.
    The US did pay an eye-watering $15mn for it, equivalent to half a trillion dollars today.
    Half a trillion is poodle-pips. The US federal government will borrow that in about eight months this financial year.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    SeanT said:

    HYUFD said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that neither of Maine's Senators are Democrats.

    Isn't there a whole libertarian, pioneer culture in that far north east corner of the USA (likewise in parts of Quebec, Nova Scotia etc). Lots of gun ownership. Individualism.
    New Hampshire is the 'live free or die' state, Quebec though is more social democratic
    Quebec is complex, I think. I've only been to Montreal which is fairly liberal (tho surprisingly religious), but parts of Quebec are very right wing, as I understand it. A mix of pioneer spirit and French exceptionalism.
    I've spent a lot of time in Montreal, and like it very much. A pleasant and affordable city. And much less boring than Toronto.
    I quite liked Montreal. But no more than that. The winter climate is horrific and the Gallic chauvinism is fairly insufferable. Also everything is quite a bit shittier than Paris - their obvious comparison - in every way, and they know it, and feel it, and feel emasculated by it, so they over-compensate with weird boasting.

    I REALLY liked the ice wine, tho.

    I've avoided it (mostly) in winter. They have some excellent outdoor concerts in summer, with everyone chilling out, drinking on the streets and having a good time. They don't do the "bed at 9pm" thing like some parts of North America.
    Yes, it's definitely more diverting than Toronto.

    But Chicago (to name somewhere nearby) has way more character and pzazz that both, for all of its problems with crime and race.

    America is just more fun than Canada, even setting climate aside.
    You've never been stranded in Provo, Utah for 48 hours.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited October 2018
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
    Surely the biggest reason he won in 2016 was because Hillary's approvals were awful too. It is entirely possible the Dems will avoid choosing a spectacularly poor candidate.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,206
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
    According to Gallup, Trump's current approval rating in the October of the second year of his presidency is lower than Obama's, George W Bush's, Bill Clinton's (though only by 2%), George HW Bush's, Jimmy Carter's, Richard Nixon's, JFK's and IKE's.

    So on that basis things are pretty bad for Trump, though he can console himself he is level with where Reagan was at this stage and Reagan recovered from his low approval rating in late 1982 and some poor midterms for his party to be re elected in 1984.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,751
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
    According to Gallup, Trump's current approval rating in the October of the second year of his presidency is lower than Obama's, George W Bush's, Bill Clinton's (though only by 2%), George HW Bush's, Jimmy Carter's, Richard Nixon's, JFK's and IKE's.

    So on that basis things are pretty bad for Trump, though he can console himself he is level with where Reagan was at this stage and Reagan recovered from his low approval rating in late 1982 and some poor midterms for his party to be re elected in 1984.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
    Will you stop using all the links I've already embedded in my piece for the morning!!

    But it is notable that Reagan had the lowest rating at this point in his presidency, and went on to the biggest win two years later.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
    According to Gallup, Trump's current approval rating in the October of the second year of his presidency is lower than Obama's, George W Bush's, Bill Clinton's (though only by 2%), George HW Bush's, Jimmy Carter's, Richard Nixon's, JFK's and IKE's.

    So on that basis things are pretty bad for Trump, though he can console himself he is level with where Reagan was at this stage and Reagan recovered from his low approval rating in late 1982 and some poor midterms for his party to be re elected in 1984.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
    Will you stop using all the links I've already embedded in my piece for the morning!!

    But it is notable that Reagan had the lowest rating at this point in his presidency, and went on to the biggest win two years later.
    Can I recommend my excellent video on whether Trump will be re-elected, which demonstrates there is essentially zero correlation between approval at this point an re-election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,206

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval rating is back at 44% with registered voters. He won with 46% in 2016.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Had he got 44% rather than 46% in 2016, Trump would have lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, all of which he won by less than 2% and Hillary would have won the Electoral College and the Presidency
    That's true, but he's got plenty of time to recover those two percentage points. Things aren't great for Trump but they're not all that bad either IMO.
    According to Gallup, Trump's current approval rating in the October of the second year of his presidency is lower than Obama's, George W Bush's, Bill Clinton's (though only by 2%), George HW Bush's, Jimmy Carter's, Richard Nixon's, JFK's and IKE's.

    So on that basis things are pretty bad for Trump, though he can console himself he is level with where Reagan was at this stage and Reagan recovered from his low approval rating in late 1982 and some poor midterms for his party to be re elected in 1984.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
    Will you stop using all the links I've already embedded in my piece for the morning!!

    But it is notable that Reagan had the lowest rating at this point in his presidency, and went on to the biggest win two years later.
    Apologies, though I am out later tomorrow morning so will not have much chance to look over but will try and catch it.

    Clinton had the second lowest rating and was also re elected, both he and Reagan had poor first mid terms, that shifted them a bit more towards the centre. As I have said Trump may be more likely to be re elected if the Democrats win the mid terms than if the GOP narrowly hold Congress.



  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    MaxPB said:


    If you ignore a thousand years of enmity and mistrust and war, sure.

    The notion that Israel would go into an alliance with a country that wants to eliminate it from the map is absurd.

    There has always been cooperation on some level despite the public bluster. Who do you think kept the Iranian F4s in the air for decades despite a US boycott?
  • Dura_Ace said:

    MaxPB said:


    If you ignore a thousand years of enmity and mistrust and war, sure.

    The notion that Israel would go into an alliance with a country that wants to eliminate it from the map is absurd.

    There has always been cooperation on some level despite the public bluster. Who do you think kept the Iranian F4s in the air for decades despite a US boycott?
    And then there was the Osirek reactor air raid in 1981...
This discussion has been closed.