Undefined discussion subject.

Options
12346»

Comments

  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    taffys said:

    Guido reports via tweet that London tories are 'chipper...'

    Spectacularly low Mayoral turnout????

    Good news, I've got a bet on Zac.
  • kle4
    kle4 Posts: 99,113
    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place.
    We shall see I guess.
  • john_zims
    john_zims Posts: 3,399
    @kle4

    'What level of low turnout would be necessary for that, given he's not likely to get as good returns from the outer boroughs as Boris either - 5%?!'


    By 4 pm the turnout was apparently 12%

  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    weejonnie said:

    AndyJS said:

    rottenborough said:

    Afternoon all,

    Are we making predictions for tonight on local council seats? I'm thinking Labour will do appallingly - a loss of around 300 seats.

    Here's the Labour defence list again:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pnBJLqgQM7-03sOfkThVnJhg97hS_aSx9QS7FtNwGC4/edit#gid=0
    As a matter of fact - what is the notional Labour-Tory Swing from the last time these were contested?
    The projected national share in 2012 was Lab 39% Con 33% and the last time the metropolitan councils were contested was last year when the result was Con 37% Lab 31% so that's a swing of 6%. Is that what you were asking?
  • ydoethur
    ydoethur Posts: 74,263
    kle4 said:

    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place.
    We shall see I guess.

    If results in Scotland and England are as bad as they appear to be, poor in Wales, bad in London and only Khan wins, on top of the last ten days of scandal and still Labour cannot ditch the Jezziah, you have to begin to wonder what would cause him to resign.
  • JackW
    JackW Posts: 14,787
    National - IPSOS/Reuters

    Clinton 56 .. Sanders 41

    Clinton 45 .. Trump 36

    http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/2016ReutersTracking5042016.pdf
  • MarkSenior
    MarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    john_zims said:

    @kle4

    'What level of low turnout would be necessary for that, given he's not likely to get as good returns from the outer boroughs as Boris either - 5%?!'


    By 4 pm the turnout was apparently 12%

    This will exclude postal votes , have no idea what % that is in London .
  • Floater
    Floater Posts: 14,207
    weejonnie said:

    Layne said:

    I wasn't sure until I went into the polling booth but ultimately I voted for UKIP for the Assembly and Goldsmith for mayor. Despite my issues with the Tory leadership and his own personal infidelities, Goldsmith is clearly a patriot with an independent mind. Those are in short supply in politics these days.

    Technically speaking, you can't say who you voted for until 10.00pm - the Guardian website is very clear on this.
    Lib Dem councillor just knocked on my door and asked who we had voted for......
  • TudorRose
    TudorRose Posts: 1,683
    john_zims said:

    @kle4

    'What level of low turnout would be necessary for that, given he's not likely to get as good returns from the outer boroughs as Boris either - 5%?!'


    By 4 pm the turnout was apparently 12%

    And 106% of the original polling list in Barnet!
  • Floater
    Floater Posts: 14,207
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Floater said:

    Worth a look

    http://hurryupharry.org/2016/05/05/a-party-for-kooks/

    Look at the momentum person mentioned.

    More trouble if he has a role in the wider Labour party

    All those claiming this stuff is just staines & right wing media forget that this website has been banging on about this stuff for ages & is of the left.
    I did try to explain that to Roger. Waste of time he just isn't interested in facts.
  • AlastairMeeks
    AlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Just back from voting. They were queuing out the door for my area. Meanwhile, the desk for the other bits of the ward was very quiet. You have to wonder about Islington Council's organisational abilities.

    Though given I turned up without the letter authorising me to cast a proxy vote, I can hardly talk.
  • tyson
    tyson Posts: 6,122
    Khan is a lose lose for Corbyn. If (when) Khan wins he will be the lightning rod for anti Corbyn attacks, emboldened by being democratically elected.

    Lose and Corbyn is dead.

    Whether Khan wins or loses will dictate whether Corbyn's death is long and slow (Khan wins), or short and sweet (Khan loses)
    kle4 said:

    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place.
    We shall see I guess.

  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077
    kle4 said:

    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place.
    We shall see I guess.

    #Tories4Corbyn
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
  • Sean_F
    Sean_F Posts: 39,132
    tyson said:

    Really love this post. Full of verve and intelligence.

    John_N4 said:

    Plato_Says said:


    [Tim Bale writes in the Torygraph that]

    "Labour voters don't have a problem with Jewish people. But London voters seem to"

    I suppose it had to happen: when people don't vote Tory, and the Tory candidate is Jewish, they get called "anti-Semitic". We're just like Hitler, right? Auschwitz types.

    If someone with a different ethnicity from my own tries to mug me, and I punch them, does that make me a "racist"? Of course it doesn't. Similarly if a Jew wants my vote and I won't give it to him. Tim Bale is in serious need of a lesson in having a bit of sense. If he can't find somewhere to get one, he's welcome to come round my place and I'll see if I can assist, with the help of a big stick.

    This kind of usage of terms, idiotic at best and mendacious more often than not, belittles the experiences of people who really do get subjected to racist attacks and abuse and prejudice.

    Has anyone else noticed how the level of bullshit in British politics seems to have risen fast in the last few days? Will it ever go back down again?

    I think that some Labour activists have come under unfair attack in recent days. Harsh criticism of Israel , per se, should not result in suspension.

    But, Livingstone really does deserve to get it with both barrels. He just enjoys poking Jews in the eye.
  • Jason
    Jason Posts: 1,614
    https://twitter.com/hashtag/VoteConservative?src=hash&lang=en-gb

    The Tories should stay away from twitter, and concentrate on the real world, and leave it to the Corbynistas and hard left lunatics who actually think it makes a difference.
  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2016
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Not in my village you don't. There isn't even a policeman or woman here. The whole system relies on honesty. Anyone could walk into the polling station and pretend to be another person and cast their vote.
  • Dixie
    Dixie Posts: 1,221
    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.
  • AlastairMeeks
    AlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @HYUFD Not only did I not need to show ID for my vote, I didn't need to show ID for my other half's proxy vote. All I had to do was confirm my name and his name to the presiding officer.
  • Scott_P
    Scott_P Posts: 51,453
    tyson said:

    Khan is a lose lose for Corbyn. If (when) Khan wins he will be the lightning rod for anti Corbyn attacks, emboldened by being democratically elected.

    Lose and Corbyn is dead.

    Whether Khan wins or loses will dictate whether Corbyn's death is long and slow (Khan wins), or short and sweet (Khan loses)

    Yes. The best result is a Khan win (33/1), Corbyn safe for another few months while more and more poison leaks from City Hall and a defenestration too late to repair the damage before 2020
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    edited May 2016
    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    edited May 2016
    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters

    Clinton 56 .. Sanders 41

    Clinton 45 .. Trump 36

    http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/2016ReutersTracking5042016.pdf

    Former presidents George HW and George W Bush have 'no plans to endorse Trump' spokesmen have said, the first time they have not officially endorsed the GOP nominee. Neither will play any role in the campaign (I expect both to vote for Hillary in the privacy of the booth)
    https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/04/bush-41-43-have-no-plans-endorse-trump/
  • runnymede
    runnymede Posts: 2,536
    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    Richard Kahn?
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077
    runnymede said:

    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    Richard Kahn?
    Oliver Kahn, surely :)
  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.
  • FrankBooth
    FrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place.
    We shall see I guess.

    If results in Scotland and England are as bad as they appear to be, poor in Wales, bad in London and only Khan wins, on top of the last ten days of scandal and still Labour cannot ditch the Jezziah, you have to begin to wonder what would cause him to resign.
    If the Corbyn-haters are smart what they will do is talk about how it's been a good night for the Conservatives. A government should be getting bruised on nights like these and they won't be. I suspect that they'll focus on Labour's failings though. But they've really got to get across that they don't like this government and want it removed.
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077
    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    runnymede said:

    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    Richard Kahn?
    Oops, sorry, I obviously meant Khan.
  • williamglenn
    williamglenn Posts: 56,290
    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
  • geoffw
    geoffw Posts: 9,161
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    @foxinsox "You cannot blame the Euro for one without crediting it for the other. "
    So the Euro is to be credited for the boom!
    Condemn the vomit but praise the binge.

    The good doctor is both right and wrong. The entry into the euro, largely thanks to low interest rates to help the sluggish German economy, caused huge booms in the periphery - Ireland, Iberia, Italy, Greece. The problem was that as early as 2003 it was clear there was a serious danger of all of them overheating in the wake of the slowdown that followed Iraq. To prevent that, the central banks of the countries took the only measure left open to them - quietly ditching capital requirements so that banks could keep lending.

    This meant however that the crash was much worse when it inevitably came. And they had no mechanism to correct it.
    Both the boom and the bust in Greece were caused by the adoption of the Euro. An unsustainable boom is not a good thing. It leads inevitably to a bust. They are linked. It was clear before the Euro came into being that one and the same interest rate would not suit all the economies of the Euroarea. (One size does not fit all). Both the boom and the bust are symptoms of a serious malaise brought on by inappropriate policy. The correct diagnosis has to be holistic.
  • ydoethur
    ydoethur Posts: 74,263
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
  • Dixie
    Dixie Posts: 1,221
    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    That is the recevied wisdom.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk
  • ydoethur
    ydoethur Posts: 74,263
    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    Can we be sure nobody knows the result yet? Jez we Khan!

    Let's wait and see what happens guys.
  • Scott_P
    Scott_P Posts: 51,453
    Hearing reports of high turnout in Edinburgh.

    Up to 80% in some polling places
  • williamglenn
    williamglenn Posts: 56,290
    geoffw said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    @foxinsox "You cannot blame the Euro for one without crediting it for the other. "
    So the Euro is to be credited for the boom!
    Condemn the vomit but praise the binge.

    The good doctor is both right and wrong. The entry into the euro, largely thanks to low interest rates to help the sluggish German economy, caused huge booms in the periphery - Ireland, Iberia, Italy, Greece. The problem was that as early as 2003 it was clear there was a serious danger of all of them overheating in the wake of the slowdown that followed Iraq. To prevent that, the central banks of the countries took the only measure left open to them - quietly ditching capital requirements so that banks could keep lending.

    This meant however that the crash was much worse when it inevitably came. And they had no mechanism to correct it.
    Both the boom and the bust in Greece were caused by the adoption of the Euro. An unsustainable boom is not a good thing. It leads inevitably to a bust. They are linked. It was clear before the Euro came into being that one and the same interest rate would not suit all the economies of the Euroarea. (One size does not fit all). Both the boom and the bust are symptoms of a serious malaise brought on by inappropriate policy. The correct diagnosis has to be holistic.
    The Greek government mishandled the situation during the boom years because they had been used to managing boom-bust cycles using currency devaluations. Their political class has learnt a hard lesson about what good governance within a currency block looks like and those mistakes will never be repeated.
  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
    The fact that it works in 99.9% of cases is testament to the honesty of most people in the UK.
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    edited May 2016
    Scott_P said:

    Hearing reports of high turnout in Edinburgh.

    Up to 80% in some polling places

    MI5 ballot stuffing? Scottish Tories largest party? :o
  • Indigo
    Indigo Posts: 9,966
    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
  • ydoethur
    ydoethur Posts: 74,263
    edited May 2016
    geoffw said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    @foxinsox "You cannot blame the Euro for one without crediting it for the other. "
    So the Euro is to be credited for the boom!
    Condemn the vomit but praise the binge.

    The good doctor is both right and wrong. The entry into the euro, largely thanks to low interest rates to help the sluggish German economy, caused huge booms in the periphery - Ireland, Iberia, Italy, Greece. The problem was that as early as 2003 it was clear there was a serious danger of all of them overheating in the wake of the slowdown that followed Iraq. To prevent that, the central banks of the countries took the only measure left open to them - quietly ditching capital requirements so that banks could keep lending.

    This meant however that the crash was much worse when it inevitably came. And they had no mechanism to correct it.
    Both the boom and the bust in Greece were caused by the adoption of the Euro. An unsustainable boom is not a good thing. It leads inevitably to a bust. They are linked. It was clear before the Euro came into being that one and the same interest rate would not suit all the economies of the Euroarea. (One size does not fit all). Both the boom and the bust are symptoms of a serious malaise brought on by inappropriate policy. The correct diagnosis has to be holistic.
    No interest rate system suits an entire national economy. The difference in nation states that stops a currency from fracturing is the capital transfers made by the government to correct or at least palliate market forces.

    The gaping and probably insoluble hole in the euro is that these simply don't happen without conditions attached that make matters worse rather than better.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    AndyJS said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
    George HW Bush is still pretty popular though and W is popular in the South
  • taffys
    taffys Posts: 9,753
    Dixie said:

    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    That is the recevied wisdom.
    Is that glint in your metaphorical eye, Mr Dixie?
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077
    AndyJS said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
    No, no - I meant reasoning behind Bush's decision.
  • Dixie
    Dixie Posts: 1,221
    Amazed if rumours of turnout in London is at 12%. Simply not true. 40% in doughnut for sure.
  • Floater
    Floater Posts: 14,207
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    That and his language on immigration, plus mutual loathing
  • taffys
    taffys Posts: 9,753
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
    George HW Bush is still pretty popular though and W is popular in the South
    So popular Jeb got completely shellacked despite untold millions spent....
  • Dixie
    Dixie Posts: 1,221
    One postal vote I saw has 16 votes from the same house.
  • JackW
    JackW Posts: 14,787
    Danielle Allen of the "Washington Post" says Clinton has fallen into a Trump trap :

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-is-walking-into-donald-trumps-trap/2016/05/04/1cbe2722-120a-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na

    Meanwhile ....

    Nate Cohn of the "New York Times" says it's an early uphill struggle for Trump :

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/upshot/trump-would-have-uphill-battle-against-clinton.html?_r=0
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    edited May 2016
    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
    Most people have to show their polling card, that is the ID election staff generally use, if you have forgotten it I will take your word for it they just take your name and address
  • Jonathan
    Jonathan Posts: 22,107
    Apols if this has been covered. When are the counts?
  • MonikerDiCanio
    MonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    The total absence of the wretched Hillary from her own propaganda says it all. She's toxic.
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Just got back from voting (just PCC here). Looking at the sheet I would say about 15% turnout in my suburban Leics hall.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    edited May 2016
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Just got back from voting (just PCC here). Looking at the sheet I would say about 15% turnout in my suburban Leics hall.

    Still up on the 11% for PCC in 2012
  • Alistair
    Alistair Posts: 23,670
    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    Why is conventional wisdom useless? Prior to the primaries Trump was Polling well and then did well. That is literally the very definition of conventional.
    The conventional stupidity of pundits was ignoring the basic facts that were staring them in the face.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    The total absence of the wretched Hillary from her own propaganda says it all. She's toxic.
    It will be an election of 'who is least loathed' this November
  • JackW
    JackW Posts: 14,787
    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    You shouldn't get too entangled by a writers metaphor as I don't.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    taffys said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
    George HW Bush is still pretty popular though and W is popular in the South
    So popular Jeb got completely shellacked despite untold millions spent....
    Jeb lost in Florida in 1994 when W won Texas, Jeb is not W
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
    Most people have to show their polling card, that is the ID election staff generally use, if you have forgotten it I will take your word for it they just take your name and address
    Yep, I misplaced my card. No ID required for my vote, they just took my word that I was who I said I was.
  • MarkSenior
    MarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Jonathan said:

    Apols if this has been covered. When are the counts?

    Some tonight , some tomorrow , a few Saturday
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Just got back from voting (just PCC here). Looking at the sheet I would say about 15% turnout in my suburban Leics hall.

    Still up on the 11% for PCC in 2012
    Mine is a high turnout area...
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
    Most people have to show their polling card, that is the ID election staff generally use, if you have forgotten it I will take your word for it they just take your name and address
    Yep, I misplaced my card. No ID required for my vote, they just took my word that I was who I said I was.
    Make the polling card compulsory then or if not at least require a bank card or driving licence if you have forgotten it
  • SimonStClare
    SimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Evening all

    The good Lady & I have just returned from casting our vote at the Sth Wilts Village Hall, (PCC only) - asked how busy it had been, one pointed to her kindle, the other to his news-paper.

    Guess it’s been pretty quiet all day. :lol:
  • kle4
    kle4 Posts: 99,113
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Nope. No ID of any sort required. I seem to recall last year there was a bit of a problem when some people turned up and were told they had already voted.

    The system is wide open to abuse. However, without any form of standard ID, no solution would be perfect either.
    Most people have to show their polling card, that is the ID election staff generally use, if you have forgotten it I will take your word for it they just take your name and address
    Says right on the polling cards you don't need to bring it with you, but that it helps.
  • MarkSenior
    MarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Alistair said:

    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    Why is conventional wisdom useless? Prior to the primaries Trump was Polling well and then did well. That is literally the very definition of conventional.
    The conventional stupidity of pundits was ignoring the basic facts that were staring them in the face.
    The conventional wisdom also sees the polls showing Hilary beating Trump easily , it is a different set of political pundits ignoring these basic facts .
  • Alistair
    Alistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
  • williamglenn
    williamglenn Posts: 56,290
    MarkSenior said:

    Alistair said:

    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    Why is conventional wisdom useless? Prior to the primaries Trump was Polling well and then did well. That is literally the very definition of conventional.
    The conventional stupidity of pundits was ignoring the basic facts that were staring them in the face.
    The conventional wisdom also sees the polls showing Hilary beating Trump easily , it is a different set of political pundits ignoring these basic facts .
    What might be more relevant is the way that Trump broke the (ARSE) ceiling as the primaries wore on. We won't have a clear indication of the national picture until it's sunk in that Trump and Clinton are the candidates.
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077
    MarkSenior said:

    Alistair said:

    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    Why is conventional wisdom useless? Prior to the primaries Trump was Polling well and then did well. That is literally the very definition of conventional.
    The conventional stupidity of pundits was ignoring the basic facts that were staring them in the face.
    The conventional wisdom also sees the polls showing Hilary beating Trump easily , it is a different set of political pundits ignoring these basic facts .
    Conventional wisdom saw a hung parliament a year ago....
  • John_N4
    John_N4 Posts: 553
    edited May 2016
    kle4 said:

    I suspect any chipper tories in London are ascribing to the theory that Khan winning is good for the Tories as it secures Corbyn in place

    I think Zac will win. But if Khan wins, he will soon get called "anti-Semitic", and Corbyn can't sack the mayor of London, so he will get hit by these nutters too. Maybe a Muslim mayor of London will be welcome in Melanie Phillips-land? Then she can continue screaming like a banshee about "Londonistan".

  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Jonathan said:

    Apols if this has been covered. When are the counts?

    Press Association list of estimated declaration times:

    http://election.pressassociation.com/declaration_times.php
  • justin124
    justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Is the UK the only country in the world where you can vote without any ID?

    Presumably you do have to show ID if you forget your poll card?
    Not so.
  • Sunil_Prasannan
    Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,077

    NEW THREAD

  • AndyJS
    AndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AndyJS said:

    A major success for Donald Trump: George W Bush has refused to endorse him. That should win Trump a stack of votes.

    Because Trump didn't endorse the Iraq War?
    Because George W Bush is immensely unpopular with voters.
    No, no - I meant reasoning behind Bush's decision.
    Trump isn't from the Republican establishment so all the Bush's dislike him.
  • John_N4
    John_N4 Posts: 553
    Polling staff's job is a) tick a person off the register when someone comes in saying that they are that person at that address (either verbally or by showing a poll card), b) raise the alarm if someone else comes in later saying that they are that person. It's not their job to check who people are.
  • justin124
    justin124 Posts: 11,527
    AndyJS said:

    Jonathan said:

    Apols if this has been covered. When are the counts?

    Press Association list of estimated declaration times:

    http://election.pressassociation.com/declaration_times.php
    Does not make a lot of sense really. Local election results are declared ward by ward. Results from the same authority will be hours apart in terms of timing.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    justin124 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Jonathan said:

    Apols if this has been covered. When are the counts?

    Press Association list of estimated declaration times:

    http://election.pressassociation.com/declaration_times.php
    Does not make a lot of sense really. Local election results are declared ward by ward. Results from the same authority will be hours apart in terms of timing.
    It will be based on when the declarations start to come through for each authority
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Just got back from voting (just PCC here). Looking at the sheet I would say about 15% turnout in my suburban Leics hall.

    Still up on the 11% for PCC in 2012
    Mine is a high turnout area...
    For the PCC, I highly doubt it
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
  • Alistair
    Alistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
  • DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 55,867
    Scottish Labour just phoned to ask to confirm that I had voted. I told them I had. I may be speaking to my better half when she gets home.
  • OldKingCole
    OldKingCole Posts: 35,275
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
    Did any other POTUS have so hostile a Congress?
  • logical_song
    logical_song Posts: 10,082
    williamglenn said:

    JackW said:

    Caitlin Huey-Burns of RCP looks at the daunting catch-up required by Trump :

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/05/nomination_in_hand_trump_faces_general_election_pressures.html

    Conventional wisdom has been proven to be a useless guide to Trump's electoral chances, so here's some more conventional wisdom so you know which arguments to ignore...

    I mean really, can we take any pundit seriously who says something like this: “Donald Trump is someone who has jumped out a 100-story window and is at floor 50, and thinks he knows how to fly."
    Trump has only had to appeal to registered Republicans so far. The combined Republican and Democrat primary turnout has been around 30% of the electorate.
  • logical_song
    logical_song Posts: 10,082
    OldKingCole said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
    Did any other POTUS have so hostile a Congress?
    Clinton?
  • logical_song
    logical_song Posts: 10,082
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Here' the link I meant to attach to my previous contribution re: 30% turnout for Primaries (D+R)
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/03/08/so-far-turnout-in-this-years-primaries-rivals-2008-record/
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
    Indeed, though Reagan's 52% average is higher than Obama's 47%
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    logical_song said:

    OldKingCole said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
    Did any other POTUS have so hostile a Congress?
    Clinton?
    Nixon
  • weejonnie
    weejonnie Posts: 3,820
    OldKingCole said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Indigo said:

    HYUFD said:

    New Hillary attack ad features leading Republicans laying into Trump
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-attacked-by-leading-republicans-in-brutal-new-hillary-clinton-advert_uk_572b00a0e4b05c31e571756f?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK&section=uk_uk

    Because the republican attack adds on him, all those millions spent by Rubio, Bush and Cruz were so effective! He is just going to point and say, what do you expect of the corrupt establishment.
    They were effective with the GOP base and the Tea Party, Hillary is targeting independents and moderates
    Some people are having a hard time comprehending that not only are the electorates for the Dem and Rep primaries different but that they are also different to the general election population.
    Exactly
    Also of note, Obama, worst president of all time greatest most crushing disappointment ever totally hated by all - currently has a higher approval rating than Saint Ronald of Regan did at this point in his term.

    Narratives, sometimes hard to fit to reality
    Did any other POTUS have so hostile a Congress?
    Obama could stand in Central Park and shoot someone's kid and it wouldn't affect his standing amongst the left.

    OT - been a rush at our polling station - MrsWJ has just voted and our family is now 3/9.
  • nunu
    nunu Posts: 6,024
    Dixie said:

    RobD said:

    Dixie said:

    Anecdote alert: All the gossip in London is contrary. Turnout of 40% plus may occur. Tories are not giving up. Labour will get swing against them. Rest is conflicting.

    High turnout is only good for Kahn, surely?
    That is the recevied wisdom.
    when you say Labour will get a swing towrads them you mean in assembley Khan has this in the bag, 8% lead I think for him.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories