Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Hunger for change. The messed-up debate about free school meals – politicalbetting.com

12346»

Comments

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,954

    HYUFD said:
    When Trump loses I wonder becomes of the MAGA army?
    MATA - Make America Trump Again.

    Grover Cleveland managed non-consecutive terms, so why not Trump, eg?

    Though wiki says Grover won the popular vote in all three presidential elections he competed in...
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    kle4 said:

    LadyG said:

    If anyone needs something scary and diverting, I recommend The Haunting of Hill House, a very clever Netflix series, which is a reworking of the famous Shirley Jackson novel from the 1950s (one of the few truly unsettling ghost stories)

    It is cheesy in parts but it gets significantly better. The Bent Neck Lady episode is whoah

    I'll confess to being a big pansy and say I find it hard to handle creepy and scary things. I put it down to seeing IT when I was 5. I was hugely uncomfortable when I saw Hereditary, apart from a scene where I burst out laughing at what was probably meant to be a horrifying moment.
    Try it. Challenge yourself. After a wobbly intro it gets properly frightening. One of the few sincerely creepy TV series I’ve seen. Check the ratings

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_haunting_of_hill_house/s01
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,776
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:
    RCP was more accurate than 538 in 2016 as was Trafalgar in the key rustbelt swing states
    Trafalgar is push polling.
    They got lucky last time around.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,846
    LadyG said:

    kle4 said:

    LadyG said:

    If anyone needs something scary and diverting, I recommend The Haunting of Hill House, a very clever Netflix series, which is a reworking of the famous Shirley Jackson novel from the 1950s (one of the few truly unsettling ghost stories)

    It is cheesy in parts but it gets significantly better. The Bent Neck Lady episode is whoah

    I'll confess to being a big pansy and say I find it hard to handle creepy and scary things. I put it down to seeing IT when I was 5. I was hugely uncomfortable when I saw Hereditary, apart from a scene where I burst out laughing at what was probably meant to be a horrifying moment.
    Try it. Challenge yourself. After a wobbly intro it gets properly frightening. One of the few sincerely creepy TV series I’ve seen. Check the ratings

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_haunting_of_hill_house/s01
    If you want creepy the film I watched last night where the character portrayed by peter dinklege was invited to a threesome by serena williams played by herself and martha stewart played by herself in the lincoln bedroom now that was creepy
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,114
    edited October 2020
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,954
    edited October 2020
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    Except Biden's not trying to have big crowds, so how are we supposed to judge based on crowd size?

    And perhaps my memory is faulty but I feel like Corbyn had the larger crowds and definitely the noisier supporters in 2019 too, though Boris's polling remained good, unlike May's.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited October 2020
    HYUFD said:
    I think this emphasises the enthusiasm gap, who the hell turns up to hear Pence talk? And yet he still had many times the size crowd in the middle of nowhere than Kamala could manage in Detroit.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    In 1896 - way before radio, tv or internet - who had the bigger crowds, William McKinley or William Jennings Bryan?

    Answer is Bryan, who made several record-setting tours across the US, while McKinley waged a "front porch" campaign where he gave few speeches and rarely left hims homestead.

    Result was a solid victory for McKinley that put White House in Republican hands for next 16 years, until GOP split in 1912 let in the Democrats.

    Thanks to COVID, in 2020 Joe Biden is waging what amounts to a early 21st century front porch campaign.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,846

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    In 1896 - way before radio, tv or internet - who had the bigger crowds, William McKinley or William Jennings Bryan?

    Answer is Bryan, who made several record-setting tours across the US, while McKinley waged a "front porch" campaign where he gave few speeches and rarely left hims homestead.

    Result was a solid victory for McKinley that put White House in Republican hands for next 16 years, until GOP split in 1912 let in the Democrats.

    Thanks to COVID, in 2020 Joe Biden is waging what amounts to a early 21st century front porch campaign.
    Yes but now we have internet, radio and tv so that is pure extrapolation and not comparable
  • Options
    The Telegraph reports more research.

    The 10pm curfew is pants, according to LSHTM.

    And a new tool from an American university considers local prevalance as a risk factor. For instance, the chance of someone having coronavirus at a 10-person event is around 12 times higher in Nottingham than in West Sussex.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/25/rule-six-curfews-probably-have-zero-effect-reducing-contacts/
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995

    HYUFD said:
    I think this emphasises the enthusiasm gap, who the hell turns up to hear Pence talk? And yet he still had many times the size crowd in the middle of nowhere than Kamala could manage in Detroit.
    Enthusiasm is great. But a super enthusiastic voter has a vote.
    The same number as one who votes with "meh" in mind.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    IBD/TIPP back up to +7, what's the opposite of KABOOM?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,114
    edited October 2020
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    Except Biden's not trying to have big crowds, so how are we supposed to judge based on crowd size?

    And perhaps my memory is faulty but I feel like Corbyn had the larger crowds and definitely the noisier supporters in 2019 too, though Boris's polling remained good, unlike May's.
    No by 2019 Boris had clearly bigger crowds than May did in 2017

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gYMYr_jFCY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLnbvyLc9kM

    Corbyn's crowds were huge at some points in 2017

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sVGp663xzI
    Not so much in 2019

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul11i6fiSo0
  • Options
    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    In 1896 - way before radio, tv or internet - who had the bigger crowds, William McKinley or William Jennings Bryan?

    Answer is Bryan, who made several record-setting tours across the US, while McKinley waged a "front porch" campaign where he gave few speeches and rarely left hims homestead.

    Result was a solid victory for McKinley that put White House in Republican hands for next 16 years, until GOP split in 1912 let in the Democrats.

    Thanks to COVID, in 2020 Joe Biden is waging what amounts to a early 21st century front porch campaign.
    Yes but now we have internet, radio and tv so that is pure extrapolation and not comparable
    My extrapolations (and other emissions) are rarely pure!

    What I mean is that today candidates have MORE ways to put their words and faces directly in front of voters. Back then you could read about politicos' speeches in the paper BUT in order to be able to hear and see them, the only way was by attending a campaign rally.
  • Options

    IBD/TIPP back up to +7, what's the opposite of KABOOM?

    Moobak.

    When Vlad rests an assault rifle on his man bosom.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    Except Biden's not trying to have big crowds, so how are we supposed to judge based on crowd size?
    Ha, Covid didn't stop the 1000s protesting over the summer, why wouldn't they turn up to a rally?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995
    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:
    When Trump loses I wonder becomes of the MAGA army?
    I think we should be very worried personally. I have heard a lot mock the americans for their right to bear arms. They say stuff like how will they stand up to the us army with their tanks and sophisticated weapons.

    One word for that Afghanistan

    tribesmen armed mostly ak47's and what other ordinance they could scrounge gave the russians first then the americans and allies a run for their money
    Trust they'd be in receipt of drone strikes, cluster bombs and cruise missiles?
    Fair's fair.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,973

    HYUFD said:
    I think this emphasises the enthusiasm gap, who the hell turns up to hear Pence talk? And yet he still had many times the size crowd in the middle of nowhere than Kamala could manage in Detroit.
    Well Biden supporters certainly seem to have enthusiasm to get to a polling booth
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,827
    New thread with a header by rcs1000.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,846

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    In 1896 - way before radio, tv or internet - who had the bigger crowds, William McKinley or William Jennings Bryan?

    Answer is Bryan, who made several record-setting tours across the US, while McKinley waged a "front porch" campaign where he gave few speeches and rarely left hims homestead.

    Result was a solid victory for McKinley that put White House in Republican hands for next 16 years, until GOP split in 1912 let in the Democrats.

    Thanks to COVID, in 2020 Joe Biden is waging what amounts to a early 21st century front porch campaign.
    Yes but now we have internet, radio and tv so that is pure extrapolation and not comparable
    My extrapolations (and other emissions) are rarely pure!

    What I mean is that today candidates have MORE ways to put their words and faces directly in front of voters. Back then you could read about politicos' speeches in the paper BUT in order to be able to hear and see them, the only way was by attending a campaign rally.
    true and for info I have not bet on you colonial elections as they are far too febrile neither do I care who wins so was merely a comment
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,827
    edited October 2020
    Nigelb said:
    Doesn't explain why Spain, Italy and France have a higher rate than Sweden where few people where masks.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,114

    IBD/TIPP back up to +7, what's the opposite of KABOOM?

    They will be back down again next week, IBID/TIPP goes up and down each week like a yo yo
  • Options

    HYUFD said:
    I think this emphasises the enthusiasm gap, who the hell turns up to hear Pence talk? And yet he still had many times the size crowd in the middle of nowhere than Kamala could manage in Detroit.
    Personally would NOT attend any campaign rally right now, even if my own sainted mother was the candidate.

    Of course Trumpskyites are VERY antsy right now, and eager to get out, mix, miggle and (super-)spread their wings.

    Whereas progressives and other anti-Trumpsky types got it out of their system earlier this year marching for BLM.
  • Options
    Andy_JS said:

    New thread with a header by rcs1000.

    Where is this new thread? I think @rcs1000 needs to add a dummy comment to make it visible via Vanilla. I can see the header but cannot comment on the pb domain.
  • Options
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    They might be wrong, but crowd size will have nothing to do with whether they are. Corbyn said the same thing.
    I would not be so sure, Corbyn had the bigger crowds in 2017 compared to May and we all know what happened there to May's big poll leads, only by 2019 had they begun to shrink while the Boris crowds grew.

    In 2016 who had the bigger crowds Trump or Hillary? Trump. In 2012 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Romney? Obama. In 2008 who had the bigger crowds Obama or Mccain? Obama.

    In 2004 who had the bigger crowds Bush or Kerry? Bush. Spot a pattern?
    In 1896 - way before radio, tv or internet - who had the bigger crowds, William McKinley or William Jennings Bryan?

    Answer is Bryan, who made several record-setting tours across the US, while McKinley waged a "front porch" campaign where he gave few speeches and rarely left hims homestead.

    Result was a solid victory for McKinley that put White House in Republican hands for next 16 years, until GOP split in 1912 let in the Democrats.

    Thanks to COVID, in 2020 Joe Biden is waging what amounts to a early 21st century front porch campaign.
    Yes but now we have internet, radio and tv so that is pure extrapolation and not comparable
    My extrapolations (and other emissions) are rarely pure!

    What I mean is that today candidates have MORE ways to put their words and faces directly in front of voters. Back then you could read about politicos' speeches in the paper BUT in order to be able to hear and see them, the only way was by attending a campaign rally.
    true and for info I have not bet on you colonial elections as they are far too febrile neither do I care who wins so was merely a comment
    No problemo
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,025
    Pagan2 said:



    tribesmen armed mostly ak47's and what other ordinance they could scrounge gave the russians first then the americans and allies a run for their money

    They did but the Taliban were able to coerce the local populace into collaboration through violence and had a deeply embedded cultural willingness to take casualties on a scale that is unimaginable to Western thinking. The best equipped and most disciplined MAGA militia vs the worst unit the US Army or National Guard will be a one way massacre.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,827

    Andy_JS said:

    New thread with a header by rcs1000.

    Where is this new thread? I think @rcs1000 needs to add a dummy comment to make it visible via Vanilla. I can see the header but cannot comment on the pb domain.
    I'm on the main site, not vanilla.
  • Options
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pagan2 said:



    tribesmen armed mostly ak47's and what other ordinance they could scrounge gave the russians first then the americans and allies a run for their money

    They did but the Taliban were able to coerce the local populace into collaboration through violence and had a deeply embedded cultural willingness to take casualties on a scale that is unimaginable to Western thinking. The best equipped and most disciplined MAGA militia vs the worst unit the US Army or National Guard will be a one way massacre.
    Taking casualties is easier when people really do believe they will literally go to heaven if killed fighting for their cause.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,350
    It’s a gun, right?
This discussion has been closed.