politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Not surprisingly YouGov finds that on EU people trust thos
Comments
-
Am I interpreting this correctly: hardly anyone seems to be trusted even by those with whom they agree.0
-
The sad thing is that there was such a candidate on offer, who even ticked the gender box.Speedy said:There is no question that if Sanders was 10-20 years younger and from a bigger state than Vermont that Hillary would have lost the nomination.
0 -
She's become thoroughly complacent after winning victories in demographically favorable areas. The Democrats will stick to their system of delegates though - Hillary actually won the popular vote in 2008...Speedy said:
Only if she manages to lose all remaining contests and by a 70-30 margin will she lose the nomination.williamglenn said:
Her nickname will have to be updated to 'Crippled Hillary' by the time she crawls across the finish lineSpeedy said:Tonight, in about 2 hours, polls close in W.Virginia, where the early Exit Poll leaks suggest to me that Sanders has beaten Hillary with close to a 2-1 margin.
The only interesting issue is that 39% of Sanders voters in W.Virginia say that they will vote Trump in the GE over Hillary in the Exit Poll.
Right now she is still on course to win California (though that maybe tightening) and N.J., but her unpopularity is showing.
There is no question that if Sanders was 10-20 years younger and from a bigger state than Vermont that Hillary would have lost the nomination.0 -
Any word on GOP WV/NE?0
-
Bernie is doing a proper job on Hillary - he won't win of course, but he's been great news for the Donald !0
-
I would not be surprised if Trump has his highest vote total in WV of any state in November, it is ideal territory for him, one of the poorest states in the union, filled with white working class voters and conservative Democrats, it has no major city and a below average percentage of college graduateswilliamglenn said:
There's some even more interesting polling numbers from WV that show a third of Democrat voters will vote Trump no matter who the Democrat nominee is.HYUFD said:In WV hardly surprising, Trump will win it by a landslide
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-democratic-primary-exit-poll-results/story?id=389927450 -
Bernie's progress with the African-American demographic that people thought were wedded to Clinton could prove to be an icebreaker for Trump to move in and carry more of the vote than expected.Pulpstar said:
She's become thoroughly complacent after winning victories in demographically favorable areas. The Democrats will stick to their system of delegates though - Hillary actually won the popular vote in 2008...Speedy said:
Only if she manages to lose all remaining contests and by a 70-30 margin will she lose the nomination.williamglenn said:
Her nickname will have to be updated to 'Crippled Hillary' by the time she crawls across the finish lineSpeedy said:Tonight, in about 2 hours, polls close in W.Virginia, where the early Exit Poll leaks suggest to me that Sanders has beaten Hillary with close to a 2-1 margin.
The only interesting issue is that 39% of Sanders voters in W.Virginia say that they will vote Trump in the GE over Hillary in the Exit Poll.
Right now she is still on course to win California (though that maybe tightening) and N.J., but her unpopularity is showing.
There is no question that if Sanders was 10-20 years younger and from a bigger state than Vermont that Hillary would have lost the nomination.0 -
Indeed W.Virginia is safe Trump country, if Trump replicates the 39% of Sanders voters that want to vote for him over Hillary in the GE in the swing states then he's won.HYUFD said:
In WV hardly surprising, Trump will win it by a landslideSpeedy said:Not many are interested but the Democratic primary race hasn't yet finished de jure.
Tonight, in about 2 hours, polls close in W.Virginia, where the early Exit Poll leaks suggest to me that Sanders has beaten Hillary with close to a 2-1 margin.
The only interesting issue is that 39% of Sanders voters in W.Virginia say that they will vote Trump in the GE over Hillary in the Exit Poll.
But I doubt it, because W.V. is a special economic case, however the interiors of Pennsylvania are similar.
Anyway looking at the primary vote results, I find that despite Trump losing Ohio by a margin to Kasich he still beat Hillary in the raw vote total, despite Hillary winning Ohio.
In Pennsylvania and Florida there where almost even.
In Texas Hillary beat Trump, but Trump almost tied her in Vermont so that is probably the home state effect of Cruz and Sanders screwing the result.0 -
It's becoming a bit of a pattern. Incredibly disappointing.runnymede said:
ugh what a grotty conman he isPlato_Says said:
If it's true, I'm seriously unimpressed. The Queen should never be used like this - ever.MonikerDiCanio said:
Cameron can't be trusted. A characteristically vulgar PR stunt from him. Her Majesty has to be on her guard when she's obliged to receive the creep.Plato_Says said:
That spin doctor on Sky thinks it's so very clever, I doubt many would agree.0 -
How stupid are the mainstream media, that they don't know they are being played by Cameron. He knows what he was doing by distracting from IDS' speech on immigration and workers rights. Oh well I guess we'll have to wait untill we get a PM who actually cares about his country before we're free from the European superstate.0
-
This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/7301524194521784320 -
Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
It is a wonderful sight to see such confidence, from people not even considering the scintilla of a faint possibility that these voices might be right.0 -
Elizabeth Warren.williamglenn said:
The sad thing is that there was such a candidate on offer, who even ticked the gender box.Speedy said:There is no question that if Sanders was 10-20 years younger and from a bigger state than Vermont that Hillary would have lost the nomination.
0 -
Did you get my PM?nunu said:How stupid are the mainstream media, that they don't know they are being played by Cameron. He knows what he was doing by distracting from IDS' speech on immigration and workers rights. Oh well I guess we'll have to wait untill we get a PM who actually cares about his country before we're free from the European superstate.
0 -
Believe in BRITAIN!Richard_Nabavi said:Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
Be LEAVE!0 -
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/7301524194521784320 -
Needle stuck Richard?Richard_Nabavi said:Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
Or is there a hidden meaning if we read it backwards?0 -
It will not, Clinton won 84% of Democrats with PPP nationally today, just that WV Democrats are amongst the most conservative in the nation, white working class and ideal targets for TrumpSpeedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_51016.pdf0 -
No, I'm simply stating things as I see them. Which is all I ever do. I'm genuinely amazed at the intellectual arrogance of the Leavers, that they can dismiss all these voices completely without any doubts.runnymede said:
Needle stuck Richard?Richard_Nabavi said:Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
Or is there a hidden meaning if we read it backwards?
I probably shouldn't be - it's lack of confidence manifesting itself as over-confidence, isn't it?0 -
IDS's assertions are in free-fall:nunu said:How stupid are the mainstream media, that they don't know they are being played by Cameron. He knows what he was doing by distracting from IDS' speech on immigration and workers rights. Oh well I guess we'll have to wait untill we get a PM who actually cares about his country before we're free from the European superstate.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-iain-duncan-smith-accused-of-lying-over-german-veto-a7022521.html
It should be Leave slamming down the dead cat to distract attention from them.0 -
Numbers like that in a place surrounded by swing states are just horrific for Clinton.Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/7301524194521784320 -
Croydon Labour Secretary suspended after defending Ken Livingstone on Hitler: https://t.co/DVXIQGygOE https://t.co/EMFmrYjbDG0
-
Possibly, but I'd wait until Sanders has given up before concluding anything;williamglenn said:
Numbers like that in a place surrounded by swing states are just horrific for Clinton.Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/7301524194521784320 -
Question is, will Richard still spin for CCHQ when a Eurosceptic leads the party?runnymede said:
Needle stuck Richard?Richard_Nabavi said:Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
Or is there a hidden meaning if we read it backwards?0 -
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/0 -
Romney won 62% in West Virginia in 2012 in a state with a plurality of registered Democrats, at the presidential level many Democrats in the state vote GOPwilliamglenn said:
Numbers like that in a place surrounded by swing states are just horrific for Clinton.Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/7301524194521784320 -
Oh, sorry, I forgot the all 19 of the other G20 finance ministers. Apologies, I didn't mean to slight these distinguished people.0
-
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.0 -
Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.
0 -
What is an "enabler" by the way ?
0 -
Someone who enables?Pulpstar said:What is an "enabler" by the way ?
0 -
I'm wondering when Remain will notice that endless appeals to authority aren't working.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
You obviously have no time for David Cameron and therefore who would you have as leader and Prime Minister post 23rd June. Genuine questionPlato_Says said:
It's becoming a bit of a pattern. Incredibly disappointing.runnymede said:
ugh what a grotty conman he isPlato_Says said:
If it's true, I'm seriously unimpressed. The Queen should never be used like this - ever.MonikerDiCanio said:
Cameron can't be trusted. A characteristically vulgar PR stunt from him. Her Majesty has to be on her guard when she's obliged to receive the creep.Plato_Says said:
That spin doctor on Sky thinks it's so very clever, I doubt many would agree.0 -
Well the only thing is : BoJo is campaigning vigorously and Obama isn't. Cameron still thinks he'd god's gift to Merkel and he's going to be on TV so much because he is PM.
Leave are doing very well by keeping Farage off the screens - although IMHO a lot of his negativity was engineered by the TV organisations. Will expect him to do well when he is allowed to argue the case, rather than having 10 second soundbites on TV.0 -
-
Don't forget the Royal College of Midwives. Very important.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
Think he is more likely to be arguing with Hamilton then putting a case. The open war fare in UKIP must see a radical change in the party post 23rd June for it to surviveweejonnie said:Well the only thing is : BoJo is campaigning vigorously and Obama isn't. Cameron still thinks he'd god's gift to Merkel and he's going to be on TV so much because he is PM.
Leave are doing very well by keeping Farage off the screens - although IMHO a lot of his negativity was engineered by the TV organisations. Will expect him to do well when he is allowed to argue the case, rather than having 10 second soundbites on TV.0 -
I wasn't wondering whether they are working. I was expressing amazement that formerly sensible people are so certain they are wrong.Plato_Says said:
I'm wondering when Remain will notice that endless appeals to authority aren't working.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.
Have you considered the possibility that they might be right?0 -
We need a sensible handover. So, I'd be okay with new leader in new year. In a choice now, May. But a contest may throw up a surprise entryBig_G_NorthWales said:
You obviously have no time for David Cameron and therefore who would you have as leader and Prime Minister post 23rd June. Genuine questionPlato_Says said:
It's becoming a bit of a pattern. Incredibly disappointing.runnymede said:
ugh what a grotty conman he isPlato_Says said:
If it's true, I'm seriously unimpressed. The Queen should never be used like this - ever.MonikerDiCanio said:
Cameron can't be trusted. A characteristically vulgar PR stunt from him. Her Majesty has to be on her guard when she's obliged to receive the creep.Plato_Says said:
That spin doctor on Sky thinks it's so very clever, I doubt many would agree.0 -
The RCM represent a lot of women!runnymede said:
Don't forget the Royal College of Midwives. Very important.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
No, I didn't forget that lot, but I gave their opinions due weight!Luckyguy1983 said:By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.
0 -
Yes but who?Plato_Says said:
We need a sensible handover. So, I'd be okay with new leader in new year.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You obviously have no time for David Cameron and therefore who would you have as leader and Prime Minister post 23rd June. Genuine questionPlato_Says said:
It's becoming a bit of a pattern. Incredibly disappointing.runnymede said:
ugh what a grotty conman he isPlato_Says said:
If it's true, I'm seriously unimpressed. The Queen should never be used like this - ever.MonikerDiCanio said:
Cameron can't be trusted. A characteristically vulgar PR stunt from him. Her Majesty has to be on her guard when she's obliged to receive the creep.Plato_Says said:
That spin doctor on Sky thinks it's so very clever, I doubt many would agree.0 -
I note that Daves comments on how corrupt Nigeria and Afghanistan are is being treated as a gaffe. Surely it is just a statement of the bleeding obvious?0
-
Quite. I simply don't see how it is news.foxinsoxuk said:I note that Daves comments on how corrupt Nigeria and Afghanistan are is being treated as a gaffe. Surely it is just a statement of the bleeding obvious?
0 -
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.0 -
I know I'm late to the party, but those figures suggest that the annoyance that I feel with Cameron at the moment is widespread.
And that he is now a total liability for the Tory party.
Time to move on sir. Thank you for your service. Shame you had to split the party before you left.0 -
I don't know why that is news.foxinsoxuk said:I note that Daves comments on how corrupt Nigeria and Afghanistan are is being treated as a gaffe. Surely it is just a statement of the bleeding obvious?
Nigeria and Afghanistan are corrupt, big deal.0 -
Kwarteng is fantastic on newsnight right now.
I am praying for Portes to be in the news more. He is the best spokesman for Leave that I've yet heard.0 -
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.0 -
Not really. They show that Leavers don't agree with him on the EU (well, that's a surprise),. and that many Remainers aren't Tories (well, there's another surprise).Mortimer said:I know I'm late to the party, but those figures suggest that the annoyance that I feel with Cameron at the moment is widespread.
And that he is now a total liability for the Tory party.
Time to move on sir. Thank you for your service. Shame you had to split the party before you left.0 -
My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.Richard_Nabavi said:
I wasn't wondering whether they are working. I was expressing amazement that formerly sensible people are so certain they are wrong.Plato_Says said:
I'm wondering when Remain will notice that endless appeals to authority aren't working.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.
Have you considered the possibility that they might be right?
The power of democracy
0 -
Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
The simple fact is that David Cameron is the one to lead the party for quite a while to allow successors to come through and May could be one but there are several younger ones who need time to develop. Post 23rd June the Government needs to start governing and move on, no matter the result. I know you are very committed to leave, indeed much more than I am to remain, but after I hope reconciliation is the order of the day.Plato_Says said:
We need a sensible handover. So, I'd be okay with new leader in new year. In a choice now, May. But a contest may throw up a surprise entryBig_G_NorthWales said:
You obviously have no time for David Cameron and therefore who would you have as leader and Prime Minister post 23rd June. Genuine questionPlato_Says said:
It's becoming a bit of a pattern. Incredibly disappointing.runnymede said:
ugh what a grotty conman he isPlato_Says said:
If it's true, I'm seriously unimpressed. The Queen should never be used like this - ever.MonikerDiCanio said:
Cameron can't be trusted. A characteristically vulgar PR stunt from him. Her Majesty has to be on her guard when she's obliged to receive the creep.Plato_Says said:
That spin doctor on Sky thinks it's so very clever, I doubt many would agree.0 -
If I was going to go for two very long shot states against the grain, I'd go Utah and New Jersey.williamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.0 -
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.0 -
Your vote is worth a lot more than Mark Carney's!Pulpstar said:My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.
The power of democracy
(Your opinion - no disrespect! - might possibly not be as well-informed...)0 -
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.0 -
Can't believe that the rabid wing of the PeeBee Tory Club seem to think that Cameron is a loser and liability. He won an election for you lot against all the odds. All other potential leaders would have most probably lost and we would be in the early stages of another long period of Labour government.0
-
As a Commonwealth citizen surely Carney's vote is as good as anyones?Richard_Nabavi said:
Your vote is worth a lot more than Mark Carney's!Pulpstar said:My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.
The power of democracy
(Your opinion - no disrespect! - might possibly not be as well-informed...)0 -
You forgot George GallowayHYUFD said:Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?
0 -
Connecticut turned Democrat over the collapse of the New England manufacturing base during Bush Snr., in one word NAFTA.HYUFD said:
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
Trump blasting NAFTA is why he is doing much better than normal in the rust belts of america.0 -
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut0 -
Oops, yes you are right, I'd forgotten that. Mea culpa!foxinsoxuk said:
As a Commonwealth citizen surely Carney's vote is as good as anyones?Richard_Nabavi said:
Your vote is worth a lot more than Mark Carney's!Pulpstar said:My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.
The power of democracy
(Your opinion - no disrespect! - might possibly not be as well-informed...)0 -
Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.HYUFD said:
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut0 -
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:
Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.HYUFD said:
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut0 -
Yes, Tommy Sheridan too I have just remembered!Richard_Nabavi said:
You forgot George GallowayHYUFD said:Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?
0 -
0
-
"Another"? Other than Blair (whose name is now an insult in Labour) ... when was the last long period of Labour government?murali_s said:Can't believe that the rabid wing of the PeeBee Tory Club seem to think that Cameron is a loser and liability. He won an election for you lot against all the odds. All other potential leaders would have most probably lost and we would be in the early stages of another long period of Labour government.
In fact I'm 34 this year and in my entire lifetime the only non-Tory to win a general election is Blair. There have been three Tory election winners in that time.
EDIT: That fact wouldn't change even if I was turning 40 this year!0 -
Chalk him up for Remain ;-)Richard_Nabavi said:
Oops, yes you are right, I'd forgotten that. Mea culpa!foxinsoxuk said:
As a Commonwealth citizen surely Carney's vote is as good as anyones?Richard_Nabavi said:
Your vote is worth a lot more than Mark Carney's!Pulpstar said:My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.
The power of democracy
(Your opinion - no disrespect! - might possibly not be as well-informed...)0 -
It turned Democrat because Clinton won by 5% in 1992 while Bush won by 8% in 1988. Connecticut is also absolutely not the rust belt by any definition of the word, it is in New England and one of the wealthiest states in the USA and commuter belt for Manhattan bankers and corporate lawyers!Speedy said:
Connecticut turned Democrat over the collapse of the New England manufacturing base during Bush Snr., in one word NAFTA.HYUFD said:
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
Trump blasting NAFTA is why he is doing much better than normal in the rust belts of america.0 -
Actually it says a lot.HYUFD said:
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:
Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.HYUFD said:
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut
Like the Miami-Dade poll yesterday pointed that Trump is actually quite close to Hillary in Florida, the PPP N.Carolina poll points to Trump being about where Romney was in the swing states.
But this is what the actual conversation about the US Presidential race should be, it's about states not national vote numbers.0 -
Remain has Gerry Adams and Ken LivingstoneRichard_Nabavi said:
You forgot George GallowayHYUFD said:Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?
0 -
Mark £624K CarneyPulpstar said:
My vote is worth the same as Mark Carney.Richard_Nabavi said:
I wasn't wondering whether they are working. I was expressing amazement that formerly sensible people are so certain they are wrong.Plato_Says said:
I'm wondering when Remain will notice that endless appeals to authority aren't working.Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.
Have you considered the possibility that they might be right?
The power of democracy 0 -
And yours truly!HYUFD said:
Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
Hillary is not Carter and Trump is not ReaganMikeK said:0 -
Lefty man-love for the Bullingdon Posh-Boy? Surely not!!murali_s said:Can't believe that the rabid wing of the PeeBee Tory Club seem to think that Cameron is a loser and liability. He won an election for you lot against all the odds. All other potential leaders would have most probably lost and we would be in the early stages of another long period of Labour government.
0 -
Wilson who was PM for 8 years and Callaghan for 3Philip_Thompson said:
"Another"? Other than Blair (whose name is now an insult in Labour) ... when was the last long period of Labour government?murali_s said:Can't believe that the rabid wing of the PeeBee Tory Club seem to think that Cameron is a loser and liability. He won an election for you lot against all the odds. All other potential leaders would have most probably lost and we would be in the early stages of another long period of Labour government.
In fact I'm 34 this year and in my entire lifetime the only non-Tory to win a general election is Blair. There have been three Tory election winners in that time.
EDIT: That fact wouldn't change even if I was turning 40 this year!0 -
But in the last 25 years, not only is Cameron the only Tory to win an election, he is the only Tory leader to even get more than 200 SEATS (a benchmark even Labour's biggest stinkers have always cleared).Philip_Thompson said:
In fact I'm 34 this year and in my entire lifetime the only non-Tory to win a general election is Blair. There have been three Tory election winners in that time.0 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933Richard_Nabavi said:
Someone who enables?Pulpstar said:What is an "enabler" by the way ?
0 -
No it points to Trump doing worse than Romney is doing and when Romney only got 206 EC votes if Trump is having to defend any of them he has next to no chance, if he loses a N Carolina or an Arizona it does not matter if he wins Ohio and Pennsylvania by a landslide, Hillary wins the presidency!Speedy said:
Actually it says a lot.HYUFD said:
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:
Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.HYUFD said:
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut
Like the Miami-Dade poll yesterday pointed that Trump is actually quite close to Hillary in Florida, the PPP N.Carolina poll points to Trump being about where Romney was in the swing states.
But this is what the actual conversation about the US Presidential race should be, it's about states not national vote numbers.0 -
Reminder of the new spreadsheet for USA 2016...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing0 -
Sometimes you need to take a step back to get some perspective.HYUFD said:
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.
A year ago the received wisdom was that Trump's candidacy was a joke and he'd now be preparing for the new season of The Apprentice. Now he's got the nomination sewn up and is already polling on par with the previous standard bearer before the head-to-head campaign seriously gets going. That's almost unbelievable and there's more to come.0 -
We are talking about 1992 here, New England had a big manufacturing industry before NAFTA as you can see from the commentary of election night:HYUFD said:
It turned Democrat because Clinton won by 5% in 1992 while Bush won by 8% in 1988. Connecticut is also absolutely not the rust belt by any definition of the word, it is in New England and one of the wealthiest states in the USA and commuter belt for Manhattan bankers and corporate lawyers!Speedy said:
Connecticut turned Democrat over the collapse of the New England manufacturing base during Bush Snr., in one word NAFTA.HYUFD said:
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
Trump blasting NAFTA is why he is doing much better than normal in the rust belts of america.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgCDcGEnSZE0 -
Nope. What all those voices have in common is that they benefit from the existence of supranational entities like the EU. But as soon as you start to look at anyone below their elitist ranks you see that the supposed benefits and the support drop off dramatically. This is why organisations like the CBI which are dominated by large multinationals are strongly in favour whilst as you move down into SME territory - which actually represents vastly more companies - support drops considerably.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, I'm simply stating things as I see them. Which is all I ever do. I'm genuinely amazed at the intellectual arrogance of the Leavers, that they can dismiss all these voices completely without any doubts.runnymede said:
Needle stuck Richard?Richard_Nabavi said:Well, I wish I shared the unshakeable, ideological, quasi-religious confidence of the Leavers that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians including the respected ones, are wrong.
Or is there a hidden meaning if we read it backwards?
I probably shouldn't be - it's lack of confidence manifesting itself as over-confidence, isn't it?
The elite have much to lose from the UK withdrawing from the EU. Normal people equally have much to gain.
The arrogance is all on the side of the Remain elite.0 -
By the way looking at the Exit Poll from W.Virginia:
44% of Sanders voters say they will vote for Trump over Hillary.
9% of Hillary voters say they will vote for Trump over Hillary.
33% of Democrats say they will vote for Trump over Hillary.
That tells me that it's 70-30 for Sanders in the W.Virginia Exit Poll.0 -
Major won in 1992, 24 years ago...Danny565 said:
But in the last 25 years, not only is Cameron the only Tory to win an election, he is the only Tory leader to even get more than 200 SEATS (a benchmark even Labour's biggest stinkers have always cleared).Philip_Thompson said:
In fact I'm 34 this year and in my entire lifetime the only non-Tory to win a general election is Blair. There have been three Tory election winners in that time.0 -
That's the schizophrenic demographic?Speedy said:9% of Hillary voters say they will vote for Trump over Hillary.
0 -
I've long been of the opinion that Blair was the smoothest operator in post-war British politics.Danny565 said:
But in the last 25 years, not only is Cameron the only Tory to win an election, he is the only Tory leader to even get more than 200 SEATS (a benchmark even Labour's biggest stinkers have always cleared).Philip_Thompson said:
In fact I'm 34 this year and in my entire lifetime the only non-Tory to win a general election is Blair. There have been three Tory election winners in that time.
His ability to hold together such a coalition of WWC, minorities, MC, Scottish, Welsh and especially Southern English voters for the Labour party will likely never be repeated.
Whilst Cameron has done well, he has not united any form of popular electorial coalition behind the Conservative party. His targeters won a few tens of thousand seats more in exactly the right places last year. Impressive, but not Blair, Major or Thatcher in 87 impressive.
0 -
Even if it had a manufacturing industry in 1992, Finance now makes up the largest share of Connecticut's economy at 16.9%, followed by real estate at 15%, manufacturing now just represents 11.9%Speedy said:
We are talking about 1992 here, New England had a big manufacturing industry before NAFTA as you can see from the commentary of election night:HYUFD said:
It turned Democrat because Clinton won by 5% in 1992 while Bush won by 8% in 1988. Connecticut is also absolutely not the rust belt by any definition of the word, it is in New England and one of the wealthiest states in the USA and commuter belt for Manhattan bankers and corporate lawyers!Speedy said:
Connecticut turned Democrat over the collapse of the New England manufacturing base during Bush Snr., in one word NAFTA.HYUFD said:
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
Trump blasting NAFTA is why he is doing much better than normal in the rust belts of america.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgCDcGEnSZE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut#Economy0 -
He can afford to lose 1 or 2 as long as he wins the big 3: Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania.HYUFD said:
No it points to Trump doing worse than Romney is doing and when Romney only got 206 EC votes if Trump is having to defend any of them he has next to no chance, if he loses a N Carolina or an Arizona it does not matter if he wins Ohio and Pennsylvania by a landslide, Hillary wins the presidency!Speedy said:
Actually it says a lot.HYUFD said:
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:
Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.HYUFD said:
Civitas is actually the latest and had Clinton 12 points ahead of Trump in the stateSpeedy said:
There was no poll in N.C. this week.HYUFD said:
kSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
The latest poll was 44-44 in N.Carolina.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_42716.pdf
Trump's poll numbers in most of the N.East are the best for a Republican since 1988, not enough for him to win a state there though.
Pennsylvania and Connecticut seem to be on the list of possible Trump wins (certainly more possible that others in the region) based on the primary vote numbers and the state polls.
https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf
Pennsylvania is possible for Trump but Clinton is more likely to win Utah than Trump is to win Connecticut
Like the Miami-Dade poll yesterday pointed that Trump is actually quite close to Hillary in Florida, the PPP N.Carolina poll points to Trump being about where Romney was in the swing states.
But this is what the actual conversation about the US Presidential race should be, it's about states not national vote numbers.0 -
Well of course you tower above them all Sunil, how could I forget!Sunil_Prasannan said:
And yours truly!HYUFD said:
Leave has Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marine Le Pen, Ian Botham, Roger Daltrey, Patrick Minford, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Joan Collins, Liz Hurley, Geoffrey Boycott, John Caudwell, Crispin Odey, Stuart Wheeler, John Mills and Peter Stringfellow, how can it lose?Luckyguy1983 said:Perhaps Richard, people are beginning to consider that President Obama, eight former US treasury secretaries dating as far back as Nixon, the OECD, the IMF, the NIESR, the CBI, the TUC, the Bank of England, five former Nato Secretaries-General, the vast majority of academic economists, all the major international investment banks, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nearly all Labour politicians, represent their own organisational interests and views on this issue, rather than being a wellspring of infallible truth and/or delphic predictions. And that those interests may not coincide with theirs.
By the way, you forgot doddery Generals, Emma Thompson, the SNP, the scientists (all of them), Oxford University, and Francois Hollande.0 -
-
The article conveniently ignores the fact that straight after the German had spouted his garbage, the World at One then interviewed the FT journalist who had closely followed all the developments up to Cameron's surrender who said that IDS's account was accurate and that up to within 24 hours of the speech Cameron had still been pushing for migration limits.Stark_Dawning said:
IDS's assertions are in free-fall:nunu said:How stupid are the mainstream media, that they don't know they are being played by Cameron. He knows what he was doing by distracting from IDS' speech on immigration and workers rights. Oh well I guess we'll have to wait untill we get a PM who actually cares about his country before we're free from the European superstate.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-iain-duncan-smith-accused-of-lying-over-german-veto-a7022521.html
It should be Leave slamming down the dead cat to distract attention from them.
There was a liar on the radio today. Unfortunately for you it is clear he was German not British.0 -
He presently trails Hillary by 6%. He did well to win the nomination yes but historically after 8 years in opposition the GOP should be favourites to win the presidency, that would not have been the case for Romney facing an incumbent president up for re-election, if Trump loses that will be the first time the GOP have lost 3 presidential elections in a row since Wendell Wilkie was their candidate in 1940!!williamglenn said:
Sometimes you need to take a step back to get some perspective.HYUFD said:
Even a tie in a state Romney won by 2% is not great news for TrumpSpeedy said:Chris Christie's former pollster is crap, over the same period PPP who are a long time reliable pollster actually headquarted in N.Carolina has Trump in a tie.
A year ago the received wisdom was that Trump's candidacy was a joke and he'd now be preparing for the new season of The Apprentice. Now he's got the nomination sewn up and is already polling on par with the previous standard bearer before the head-to-head campaign seriously gets going. That's almost unbelievable and there's more to come.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html0 -
You fell into my area now.HYUFD said:
Even if it had a manufacturing industry in 1992, Finance now makes up the largest share of Connecticut's economy at 16.9%, followed by real estate at 15%, manufacturing now just represents 11.9%Speedy said:
We are talking about 1992 here, New England had a big manufacturing industry before NAFTA as you can see from the commentary of election night:HYUFD said:
It turned Democrat because Clinton won by 5% in 1992 while Bush won by 8% in 1988. Connecticut is also absolutely not the rust belt by any definition of the word, it is in New England and one of the wealthiest states in the USA and commuter belt for Manhattan bankers and corporate lawyers!Speedy said:
Connecticut turned Democrat over the collapse of the New England manufacturing base during Bush Snr., in one word NAFTA.HYUFD said:
For Bush Snr who is miles apart philosophically from Trumpwilliamglenn said:
It had previously been a solid Republican state prior to Bill Clinton's first term.HYUFD said:
Connecticut will comfortably go Democrat as it always does (Obama won it by 18% in 2012 but Pennsylvania by just 5%) and Hillary led Trump in North Carolina 49% to 37% in the latest poll this weekSpeedy said:
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania she might also lose Connecticut, Trump was down by 7 there a month ago.HYUFD said:
As I said in the last thread Hillary can win 276 to 262 if she adds Arizona (she leads in the latest poll thanks to Hispanic voters) even if she loses Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida (and obviously West Virginia)Pulpstar said:
It won't nationally, but it could be a problem in Pennsylvania and Ohio...Speedy said:This is a number that Hillary should pray it does not replicate nationally:
https://twitter.com/CBSNLive/status/730152419452178432
http://www.270towin.com/
Also N.Carolina.
Trump blasting NAFTA is why he is doing much better than normal in the rust belts of america.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgCDcGEnSZE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut#Economy
9.9% of workers in Connecticut work in manufacturing.
12.6% in Ohio.
9.8% in Pennsylvania.
Connecticut is not that different, I'm focusing on workers because GDP doesn't vote.
Indiana has the largest share in the USA with 16.8% .
Hawaii has the lowest with 2.2% .0 -
Yes thanx a lot to ponder.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Did you get my PM?nunu said:How stupid are the mainstream media, that they don't know they are being played by Cameron. He knows what he was doing by distracting from IDS' speech on immigration and workers rights. Oh well I guess we'll have to wait untill we get a PM who actually cares about his country before we're free from the European superstate.
0
