Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Veteran US pollster Frank Luntz is right – it will be the econ
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Veteran US pollster Frank Luntz is right – it will be the economy not Iran that decides WH2020
The 2020 election will be decided on middle-class economic issues.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
TBH there was next to no discussion of the leadership election, save for a short discussion on the timing of the CLP nomination meeting. CLP meetings are still in the grip of the far left, but so what given that only llittle over 5% of the total membership was in attendance. However, no-one spoke to try and portray the election result as some sort of victory, so at least we are not in wholesale denial, which in context is quite surprising. The defeated ex-MP didn't bother turning up.
He's second in South Carolina, and third in Nevada.
Still, that's a staggering result for a man no one's heard of.
The most important of these is New Hampshire, and there's a poll out from Monmouth, which is regarded as an "A+" pollster by 538.
They polled in three different ways. First they asked, including all the candidates names. Then they did a forced choice with just the top seven candidates, and finally they asked with just the top four: Biden, Buttigieg, Sanders and Warren.
When all candidates were "on the menu", Buttigieg was in the lead with 20%, against 19% for Biden and 18% for Sanders. Cut the race down to the top four, and it Biden 24%, Buttigieg 23% and Sanders 21%.
What's particularly interesting about this poll is that Biden picks up five points as the field narrows, while Buttigieg and Sanders pick up three.
Away from NH, there were Fox News Polls for California, where Sanders is on 24% and has a narrow lead on Warren 21% and Biden 20%. Wisconsin, where the leaders are reversed. Nevada where it's Biden in the lead with Sanders, Steyer and Warren in hot pursuit. And South Carolina where it's an absolutely massive Biden lead over Steyer in second.
If it was found that Labour would poll more than a couple of percentage points worse if led by Ms 10 out of 10, then there might be some impact on the actual leadership vote by members.
My drinking buddy, who is non political though more often than not votes Labour, is my focus group of 1. He has registered that there is a contest going on. He thinks Jess Phillips comes across as a real person, but didn't like the look of the woman from Bolton. We spent some time trying to work out whether this was the one from Salford or Wigan, to no avail as he couldn't remember the colour of her hair. He knew there was a man standing, but knew nothing about him, although when I revealed the back story of the grammar school boy (like him) who had made good he liked it.
+9 Biden
+4.5 Sanders
+8.2 E Warren
+9.3 Buttigieg
+11.8 Klobuchar
-20.1 Bloomberg
+256.9 Steyer
Firstly, this is not "winner takes all". This is why Biden's massive lead in South Carolina matters. He could easily end up with 60% of the delegates there, while the winners in Iowa and New Hampshire could have (in theory at least) just 25% of the delegates from each.
Secondly, it's important to think in terms of forced choice, given that so few of the candidates (probably just two) will still be in the game post Super Tuesday. And the most likely pair are Sanders and Biden. (Although it's entirely possible that Warren and Buttigieg outperform in NH and Iowa, and it ends up being Warren vs Buttigieg.)
He's in the debate in January for one, polling OK in early states and actually can win some early delegates unlike a certain other billionaire
Can a man not dream
Pleased to know that you and Mrs Malcolmg will be among the living for a while yet.
He has next to no ground organisation in Nevada, which is a caucus state. He's also only in the low teens. It's quite possible he gets no delegate there.
And he's basically below the 15% threshold in South Carolina, which means he'll only pick up delegates in perhaps half the precincts. That means that (assuming his vote share holds at current levels) he'll get about 10% of the SC delegates.
So, while 400-1 might be value. It's not compelling value. His path to the nomination is incredibly narrow compared to even candidates like Klobuchar.
But stripping them of titles or HRH is (a) far from simple, requiring an Act of Attainder, and (b) a gross over-reaction.
The former Edward VIII, later Duke of Windsor, remained his title and even HRH even after negotiating with the Nazis in World War 2 to become King of England following a German victory.
By comparison, Prince Harry didn't talk to the Queen before announcing something.
Presidential powers to do military stuff in Iraq are currently based on a couple of congressional resolutions authorising military force.
The constitutional position is unequivocal that the President must have congressional approval to declare war, but an enormous amount of wiggle room has developed over recent decades.
You’d think people would learn from this kind of object lesson...
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/01/09/business/japan-retailers-cheaper-us-foods/
With the Japan-U.S. trade agreement going into force on Jan. 1, major Japanese supermarkets have started slashing prices on U.S. products affected by the tariff cuts in a bid to attract customers.
Ito-Yokado Co. launched a six-day sale at some 130 outlets on Wednesday, lowering the prices on nine items, including the price of U.S. Angus loin steak by over 10 percent and oranges by 10 to 20 percent....
And an Act of Attainder might be a bit of an overkill (in historical senses, literally...)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder#United_Kingdom
Other sources suggest According to Mrs Koenig*, Prince Harry can simply renounce his peerage. However, to rescind his HRH title, The Queen would likely need to issue a Letters Patent.
https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/insight/will-prince-harry-lose-his-place-in-the-line-of-succession-135960/
* Great name for a royal historian: http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/p/recognized-expert-on-british-and.html
When Princess Margaret was confronted with her options over Townsend it was losing her HRH that swung it.....
But he is the son of the Prince of Wales. And he's not actually done anything other behaved like a spoiled, pretulant brat. If we're going to have a Royal Family, then they are members through birth, and remain so unless they do something really heinous. I find it astonishing that there's far more talking of stripping HRH from Harry than from Prince Andrew. What is the bar, here? Because the bar has to be pretty high if Harry is to lose it, but it also seems to need to be pretty low if Andrew is not to lose it.
His Royal HighnessThe Duke of Sussex recommends....
If they want to "step away" from the Royal Family then they should. Since they have branded themselves as "Sussex" losing "HRH" would appear to be less of an issue than renouncing "Sussex". "His Grace, the Duke of Sussex" is not too shabby.....
And it does appear to be a Letters Patent issue, not a Bill/Act of Attainder...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Highness#United_Kingdom
https://twitter.com/SurreyPolice/status/1215342586845630470?s=20
UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget
The report said it was disappointing to see the MoD making similar mistakes to ones it made 30 years ago.
Mr Cummings, who has been a harsh critic of defence procurement, has already held talks with Defence Secretary Ben Wallace about ways of tackling waste.
Mr Wallace recently admitted there was a shortfall in the department's budget.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51052124
The Tories have three other great weapons in their arsenal. The first is highlighted in the title of one of the best books on the party, John Ramsden’s “An Appetite for Power”. The Conservatives have always been quick to dump people or principles when they become obstacles to the successful pursuit of power. Theresa May immediately sacked her two chief advisers, Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy, after the party’s poor performance in 2017, whereas Jeremy Corbyn is still clinging on to Karie Murphy and Seumas Milne after Labour’s devastating failure last week.
The second is patriotism. The Tories have always played this card better than any other party, whether in the form of imperialism in the 1870s or retaking the Falkland islands in the 1980s. They have been much aided in this by those radical intellectuals who admire any institution or cause so long as it is not British.
No one should underestimate the party’s third weapon: jollity. The Conservatives have always been the party of “champagne and women and bridge”, to borrow a phrase from Hilaire Belloc, whereas the Liberals and Labour have been the parties of vegetarianism, book clubs and meetings. Conservatives are never happier than when mocking the left for its earnestness.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/12/21/britains-tories-are-the-worlds-most-successful-party-heres-why
I'm really struggling to understand how they are more deserving to lose their HRH than Prince Andrew.
But, HRH Kiddie Fiddler = retains brand value.
As a marketing man (in my former life), I just can’t see what you’re on about.
Incidentally, we’ve got a similar issue here in Sweden, although most Swedes care little. Mind you, nobody here has been named in a US lawsuit over underage sex. Nor has anyone stormed off in a huff to Canada.
- “The loss of HRH: what Sweden’s royal changes mean for five princes and princesses”
https://royalcentral.co.uk/europe/sweden/the-loss-of-hrh-what-swedens-royal-changes-mean-for-five-princes-and-princesses-131664/
In the face of the evidence, Iran is going to be much better off quickly admitting they messed up, handing over the black boxes for analysis and paying compensation to those affected. Any other response is going to lead to an escalation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/world/middleeast/iran-plane-crash-ukraine.html
Also interesting that Iran has invited NTSB and Boeing to participate in the investigation, as it usual - although inviting them and letting them near the remain of the plane are two different things. Ironically, if they see with their own eyes what has been circulated by photo, that the remaining bits of the plane are covered in shrapnel, they won’t hang around for long. Their role is technical and not political, they are only interested in preventing more accidents.
Good news indeed.
Although the forum won’t be quite the same without malc’s blubber.
1) It was created more than a year ago.
2) Even if it were not, first generation peerages cannot be renounced. Only inherited peerages.
The title could be removed, but it would require an act of Parliament. I don’t quite see that happening.
A more likely scenario would be that they simply stop using it.
Ironic, the way things turn out.
Jumping onboard the outrage bus because it happens to be the lefty-liberal Harry and Meghan just screams hypocrisy.
The conservative royals like Andrew and co. who offer nothing, its fine for them to leach off the taxpayer though clearly.
Unbelievable.
Dafuq.
On the day the WDA passed the Commons, a dusky immigrant was harassed out of the country. Coincidence or not?
Was preparing for a Harry and Meghan update whereas the item was about Iran and the plane ffs.
Dr. Foxy, your comment would have more merit if other royals (even the Queen, in the aftermath of Diana's death) hadn't also had a lot of rubbish poured on them by the media over the years.
I find myself unable to care what on earth they do. Hearing the various details behind it still leaves me cold.
The irony is that old fool Khamenei will now probably shoot several of his own generals for this cock up, which will damage the government further.
The further irony is of course that whether it’s true or not people will believe it because it’s exactly the sort of stupid error the Iranians would make and then try to cover up (cf those Marines and their boats).
Suck it up instead of whining about it.... or do you think you have the right to tell them what they can publish??..You would be far better off directing your attention to the anonymous filth that is being published on social media... there is a case for action there.