Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Purge: Election Year

24

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867
    Sounds like wishful thinking to me TSE!
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    Type Scottish Tory surge KLAXON every now and again.

    Can't believe that prophecy actually came true.......
    Well you can't be everything for everyone forever.

    The time for the SNP to choose if it's a left wing or a right wing party is approaching.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    vik said:

    Clinton's lead falls to only 1 point in the latest Gravis poll. It was 5 points in the poll conducted 2 weeks ago.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

    Lets wait till Monday for the weekly update to my average daily tracking poll.

    If things continue it will probably show Trump at his best position since July 31st, but most tracking polls stop publishing over the weekend, so lets wait till Monday to be sure.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    edited August 2016
    Mr. Sandpit, I hope so.

    I'm reasonably happy with it, but the Wehrlein bet was trickier to try and work out if it made sense or not.

    Incidentally, the fastest strategy, according to Pirelli, is 2 soft tyre stints and 1 medium tyre stint.

    Verstappen must hope they're wrong.

    Edited extra bit: or that it rains, of course.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Mr. G, it's difficult now. Things will likely come to a head in the nearish future. On the plus side, I've got the trilogy lined up (book 1 done, book 2 almost done, about 1/4 into draft 1 of book 3) plus one completed and one roughly half-completed sequel to Sir Edric, so if things are even so-so I can churn out new novels yearly until the next election.

    It's tough, though.

    I did have work writing something else [don't want to go into detail, it was just boring news stuff] on a part-time basis but that folded for technical reasons. Ironically, the only area I'm exceeding expectations is gambling. My total funds in accounts have roughly tripled since 2009, and that's with the initial deposits long since withdrawn. Small sums, alas, but there we are.

    [I might shove together a beginner's guide to F1 betting to self-publish, if I have the time].

    Don't be fooled by Mr. T's success. It's very difficult, especially with sci-fi/fantasy (which are still seen as niche genres) to make anything approaching a living.

    Anyway, got a story in a fantasy anthology early next year, and one of the other contributors (Adrian Tchaikovsky[sp]) recently won an award, so that (and a few other pretty big names) should help sales, and I'm hoping that, in turn, will help drive readers from that to Kingdom Asunder, which should be out late this year/early next.

    Ahem, I apologise for banging on about this. I think a bit of self-promotion is ok, but I don't want to go overboard, so I'll stop rambling about this [and confine my rambling to F1]. The pre-race piece is mostly done, but the markets are still half asleep.

    Writing unless you are very lucky is a crap way of earning a living. A very, very small minority of authors make it big time and a small few, like our own Mr. T., make a good living. However, most do not. I did a text book some years ago and according to Oxford University Press, who published the thing it, it sold much better than their expectations - they even came back to me for a second edition. I got paid 50p per copy sold with no minimum sale.

    I'd have been financially much better off stacking shelves at Tescos instead of spending those hours researching and writing. The trick I am told is to use the book, especially a non-fiction book, as leverage for paid speaking gigs and the like, but like Mr. D, I hated doing the self-publicity guff. When OUP came to me for a third edition I told them I wasn't interested.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    vik said:

    Clinton's lead falls to only 1 point in the latest Gravis poll. It was 5 points in the poll conducted 2 weeks ago.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

    Sleazy Clinton on the slide.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    Unrealistic, current Labour voters in that same poll give it 66-34 for Corbyn and members tend to be more left wing than voters.

    Smith's own campaign posted that in order for them to win even by the slimmest of margins they would need more than 60% of the registered supporters and trade unionists, it's more likely that Corbyn gets that than Smith.
    Where do you get those figures from? In any case Labour members voting will be pre January members many of whom will have campaigned for Blair and Brown in the past and will be more rightwing than many voting for Corbyn led Labour. Turnout of registered supporters may also be lower due to the £25 fee and some will have been signed up by 'Save Labour' to back Smith
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    justin124 said:

    Indeed so - but Labour did manage to win three seats when most commentators had predicted none at all!
    3 seats when they used to win close to 50
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100



    I appreciate that it's an unweighted subsample of 150 but YouGov's poll yesterday had the Scottish share for Westminster as

    SNP 50
    Con 25
    Lab 12
    Grn 5
    LD 4
    UKIP 2

    Why the heck did Smith say that Kezia Dugdale is doing a great job ?
    Of course you are going to be laughed at a TV debate if you say that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    vik said:

    Clinton's lead falls to only 1 point in the latest Gravis poll. It was 5 points in the poll conducted 2 weeks ago.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

    Takes Clinton's lead down to 4% with RCP
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    edited August 2016

    Writing unless you are very lucky is a crap way of earning a living. A very, very small minority of authors make it big time and a small few, like our own Mr. T., make a good living. However, most do not. I did a text book some years ago and according to Oxford University Press, who published the thing it, it sold much better than their expectations - they even came back to me for a second edition. I got paid 50p per copy sold with no minimum sale.

    I'd have been financially much better off stacking shelves at Tescos instead of spending those hours researching and writing. The trick I am told is to use the book, especially a non-fiction book, as leverage for paid speaking gigs and the like, but like Mr. D, I hated doing the self-publicity guff. When OUP came to me for a third edition I told them I wasn't interested.
    I admire writers greatly and kudos for trying MD, however the best way to do it is probably have a full time professional job and write in the evenings and at weekends and on holiday if you have the stamina in the hope of a bestseller to set you on your way
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:



    Where do you get those figures from? In any case Labour members voting will be pre January members many of whom will have campaigned for Blair and Brown in the past and will be more rightwing than many voting for Corbyn led Labour. Turnout of registered supporters may also be lower due to the £25 fee and some will have been signed up by 'Save Labour' to back Smith

    I got the 66-34 figures from the same BMG poll.
    And what Smith needs from Saving Labour.

    As I said, if Smith needs more than 60% of registered voters and trade unionists to win by the slimmest of margins (according to his own campaign), it's unrealistic that he has a chance.
  • I self-published a book, "The Littletons of Teddesley Hall", two years ago. It has just cleared a thousand pounds profit. It could have sold more but I can no longer bear posing for the obligatory photo in local newspapers, holding a copy next to my head with a cheesy grin.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Mr. Sandpit, I hope so.

    I'm reasonably happy with it, but the Wehrlein bet was trickier to try and work out if it made sense or not.

    Incidentally, the fastest strategy, according to Pirelli, is 2 soft tyre stints and 1 medium tyre stint.

    Verstappen must hope they're wrong.

    Edited extra bit: or that it rains, of course.

    But a lot of people start on the crappy supersofts, so half the field will probably three-stop. There's loads of strategy options, especially for Lewis at the back, then throw in a safety car or some rain and things are well set up for a great race tomorrow.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    I got the 66-34 figures from the same BMG poll.
    And what Smith needs from Saving Labour.

    As I said, if Smith needs more than 60% of registered voters and trade unionists to win by the slimmest of margins (according to his own campaign), it's unrealistic that he has a chance.
    They look a bit suss given 2015 Labour voters are still on the whole voting Labour even if a few have left for the Tories or UKIP.

    Smith needs to win members, who following the Court ruling will be longer standing and less pro Corbyn, as well as trade unionists, registered supporters will still most likely vote for Corbyn though Smith might narrow the gap
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    :smiley:

    Hornby
    OUT NOW - Virgin East Coast Train Pack. Complete with two Mk4 coaches with many empty seats. https://t.co/W1RFFZ8vlN https://t.co/sYbxt144Yu
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    Mr. Sandpit, a lot?

    Who, besides Verstappen? Only the top 10 are locked into a choice. The rest will likely go soft, or, if they want to try something, medium to string out the first stint.

    Assuming it's dry, of course.
  • I self-published a book, "The Littletons of Teddesley Hall", two years ago. It has just cleared a thousand pounds profit. It could have sold more but I can no longer bear posing for the obligatory photo in local newspapers, holding a copy next to my head with a cheesy grin.

    Best not give up the day job quite yet.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,965
    I backed Smith at 28/5 a couple of days ago and I make a reasonable profit either way - really should have got in when Betfair had him at 6% though...
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Speedy said:

    Well you can't be everything for everyone forever.

    The time for the SNP to choose if it's a left wing or a right wing party is approaching.
    I think most people are happy with a manergerial government, as long as you don't take away their freebies and don't raise their taxes the public will vite for you.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344
    Speedy said:


    The time for the SNP to choose if it's a left wing or a right wing party is approaching.

    Just like SLab!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,518

    Writing unless you are very lucky is a crap way of earning a living. A very, very small minority of authors make it big time and a small few, like our own Mr. T., make a good living. However, most do not. I did a text book some years ago and according to Oxford University Press, who published the thing it, it sold much better than their expectations - they even came back to me for a second edition. I got paid 50p per copy sold with no minimum sale.

    I'd have been financially much better off stacking shelves at Tescos instead of spending those hours researching and writing. The trick I am told is to use the book, especially a non-fiction book, as leverage for paid speaking gigs and the like, but like Mr. D, I hated doing the self-publicity guff. When OUP came to me for a third edition I told them I wasn't interested.
    No one should expect to earn a living from writing, until they've really made a breakthrough. There are lots of good writers who get nowhere, and lots of others who do fairly well, but never well enough to give up the day job. And there are sadly, talentless hacks who strike gold.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    Sean_F said:


    No one should expect to earn a living from writing, until they've really made a breakthrough. There are lots of good writers who get nowhere, and lots of others who do fairly well, but never well enough to give up the day job. And there are sadly, talentless hacks who strike gold.

    There are also hacks who invent quotes from interviews that never occurred...and get paid handsomely for it....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    Mr. Urquhart, Andrew Neil recently called out the Guardian for a headline quote-that-wasn't.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    More overturning of headscarf bans in Turkey:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37205850

    I did enjoy this line:
    "No strong opposition has been voiced against this latest move."

    No shit, Sherlock. The media's been shut down or taken over if it isn't pro-Erdogan and he's suspended over a third of the judiciary for 'links' with the coup attempt.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016

    More overturning of headscarf bans in Turkey:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37205850

    I did enjoy this line:
    "No strong opposition has been voiced against this latest move."

    No shit, Sherlock. The media's been shut down or taken over if it isn't pro-Erdogan and he's suspended over a third of the judiciary for 'links' with the coup attempt.

    No outrage on twitter....on wait....
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,518

    There are also hacks who invent quotes from interviews that never occurred...and get paid handsomely for it....
    Johan Hari
  • Sean_F said:

    Johan Hari
    No...David Rose...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    Oh England you are making a mess of this easy victory.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    Met Police rolls out real-time live face-spotting tech

    London’s Metropolitan Police will trial an automated facial recognition system to identify people at this weekend's Notting Hill Carnival as the government continues to drag its feet on the use of the technology.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/26/notting_hill_carnival_police_surveillance_cameras_automated_face_recognition/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    Speedy said:

    The problem for Labour in scotland was that it was too right wing and disconnected from it's local base, the SNP saw that and latched to it.

    Now due to FPTP it's too late to save scottish Labour, but the SNP moving left means that is losing to it's right towards the Tories.

    For a recovery in scotland, S.Labour needs 3 things to happen simultaneously and for the long term:

    1. A left wing local leader.
    2. The SNP moving right to counter the Tories.
    3. Oil prices to be low.
    The Tories are nowhere, SNP hav eno need to fear the Scottish Tories, it is the Westminster ones that are the problem.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    Speedy said:

    Well you can't be everything for everyone forever.

    The time for the SNP to choose if it's a left wing or a right wing party is approaching.
    Right wing will never win elections in Scotland. It needs to stay centre left to stay on top.
  • Jesus surely England can't lose this game....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    Mr. Urquhart, Jesus won't help you. It's Nike, Goddess of Victory, whom you must appease.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Jesus surely England can't lose this game....

    Be positive! Ali just has to play for Root's century and everything will work out nicely
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362
    malcolmg said:

    The Tories are nowhere, SNP hav eno need to fear the Scottish Tories, it is the Westminster ones that are the problem.
    I thought the Scottish Tories were the official opposition in Scotland? :p
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited August 2016
    Sean_F said:

    No one should expect to earn a living from writing, until they've really made a breakthrough. There are lots of good writers who get nowhere, and lots of others who do fairly well, but never well enough to give up the day job. And there are sadly, talentless hacks who strike gold.
    From Jay obit re Yes, Minister. Sounds like serious dosh 30yrs ago

    "Jay said that because the BBC paid just £1,200 for each script, he and Lynn had to keep their day jobs and could not afford to write close to transmission."

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/register/sir-antony-jay-g9m5rr2jc
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Smith isn't Smith. Smith is Not-Corbyn. Smith might well be useless but Corbyn is not only demonstrably useless but is content to risk wrecking his own party into the bargain, in pursuit of his 'ideals'. The worst that Smith offers is a sound defeat in 2020; Corbyn risks Labour's annihilation. It's that which is his appeal to the Labour selectorate.
    I also think that Smith is capable or even likely to quit as leader fairly quickly if things go badly. Corbyn is stickier than tar.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    PlatoSaid said:



    From Jay obit re Yes, Minister. Sounds like serious dosh 30yrs ago

    "Jay said that because the BBC paid just £1,200 for each script, he and Lynn had to keep their day jobs and could not afford to write close to transmission."

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/register/sir-antony-jay-g9m5rr2jc

    It not well paid, in the way Leader of the Opposition, where £150k+ a year, £600k home and £1.5 million pension pot doesn't make one wealthy.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    GeoffM said:

    Be positive! Ali just has to play for Root's century and everything will work out nicely
    Looks like the overrated two-game-flash-in-the-pad beardy can't bowl for toffee selfish git is going to leave Joe Root stranded.
  • Joe Root just done a Joe Root...
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Met Police rolls out real-time live face-spotting tech

    London’s Metropolitan Police will trial an automated facial recognition system to identify people at this weekend's Notting Hill Carnival as the government continues to drag its feet on the use of the technology.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/26/notting_hill_carnival_police_surveillance_cameras_automated_face_recognition/

    I am not sure where you get the idea that HMG is dragging its feet on facial recognition software. When I was there the Home Office was all for it, the problem was nobody could deliver a system that actually worked in operational conditions.

    In the late 1990s there was a Canadian system that was developed for casino operators and it was very good indeed. It could identify a person despite them now having gained or having lost facial hair, spectacles, hair lines etc.. It just didn't work under variable lighting conditions, as found out on the streets. There were extensive trials too in advance of and during the 2002 World Cup. Still nobody could make it work.

    After that I don't know what has been happening on the technology front but I am sure the Plod and HMG would love to get their hands on a working system.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016

    I am not sure where you get the idea that HMG is dragging its feet on facial recognition software. When I was there the Home Office was all for it, the problem was nobody could deliver a system that actually worked in operational conditions.

    In the late 1990s there was a Canadian system that was developed for casino operators and it was very good indeed. It could identify a person despite them now having gained or having lost facial hair, spectacles, hair lines etc.. It just didn't work under variable lighting conditions, as found out on the streets. There were extensive trials too in advance of and during the 2002 World Cup. Still nobody could make it work.

    After that I don't know what has been happening on the technology front but I am sure the Plod and HMG would love to get their hands on a working system.
    I didn't say that...it is a quote from the Register article.

    I actually agree...also it is a big problem when you scale these things. Even fingerprints systems (that is supposed to be a more mature technology) can't cope with uniquely identify from whole populations with high levels of accuracy (even when fingerprints are taken in fairly controlled conditions, let alone ones when not ideal ones).

    You only can to think about how fussy they are about passport photographs to know how facial recognition is still a far from solved problem.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    RobD said:

    I thought the Scottish Tories were the official opposition in Scotland? :p
    LOL
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Joe Root just done a Joe Root...

    It was either push on or end up marooned on 92*
  • GeoffM said:

    It was either push on or end up marooned on 92*
    I would have batted for the average ;-)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    PlatoSaid said:

    From Jay obit re Yes, Minister. Sounds like serious dosh 30yrs ago

    "Jay said that because the BBC paid just £1,200 for each script, he and Lynn had to keep their day jobs and could not afford to write close to transmission."

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/register/sir-antony-jay-g9m5rr2jc
    But how many scripts were they doing, a dozen a year? That's only seven grand each, not a lot of cash.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Jesus surely England can't lose this game....

    Did look a little dicey a few overs back, but we got there in the end.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    I would have batted for the average ;-)
    Considering my terrible performance so far in our national league this season I'd be amazingly grateful to have the choice!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    Talking of facial recognition, I read an interesting paper the other day where they had taken photos of individuals from social media posts, built a 3d face model from them and defeated various "state of the art" recognition systems with them.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    I appreciate that it's an unweighted subsample of 150 but YouGov's poll yesterday had the Scottish share for Westminster as

    SNP 50
    Con 25
    Lab 12
    Grn 5
    LD 4
    UKIP 2
    Yes - but crossbreaks are unreliable and not intended to be representative. They also fluctuate widely.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    The link speaks for itself:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/27/prime-minister-theresa-may-spotted-watching-england-vs-pakistan/

    The PM watching the cricket, hopeful in itself as long as she doesn't follow the fate of another recent cricket-fan PM.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016

    The link speaks for itself:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/27/prime-minister-theresa-may-spotted-watching-england-vs-pakistan/

    The PM watching the cricket, hopeful in itself as long as she doesn't follow the fate of another recent cricket-fan PM.

    I some how doubt we will be seeing her at Aston Ham United....
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I some how doubt we will be seeing her at Aston Ham United....
    The way Aston Ham United are playing we may not see anyone there?
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    HYUFD said:



    Where do you get those figures from? In any case Labour members voting will be pre January members many of whom will have campaigned for Blair and Brown in the past and will be more rightwing than many voting for Corbyn led Labour. Turnout of registered supporters may also be lower due to the £25 fee and some will have been signed up by 'Save Labour' to back Smith

    Best odds on Smith are now 5/1. Two weeks ago you could get 7/1. 5/1 still seems far too long. Maybe 5/1 would be right if we had a string of opinion polls out tomorrow all showing around 55%-45% to Corbyn, but given that we've been in a polling vacuum in August there isn't enough certainty to warrant odds that long.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    Talking of facial recognition, I read an interesting paper the other day where they had taken photos of individuals from social media posts, built a 3d face model from them and defeated various "state of the art" recognition systems with them.

    They should use them in Telford

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horrific-abuse-scandal-town-dubbed-8718139#ICID=sharebar_twitter
  • PlatoSaid said:

    They should use them in Telford

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horrific-abuse-scandal-town-dubbed-8718139#ICID=sharebar_twitter
    "Allegations go back at least 20 years of child sex abuse at the hands of gangs in Telford, predominantly from the town’s Pakistani community."

    Apparently "logged incorrectly"....
  • HYUFD said:

    Compared to Corbyn a mouldy cabbage would be heavyweight and Labour is not exactly full of heavyweight alternatives to Smith either which was why he was the candidate in the first place. If Smith wins he hasthe MPs vote and Brown never won the membership) Smith would be in a very powerful position.

    Umunna and Jarvis would be insane to take the Labour leadership and lose to May in 2020 which is why they will let Smith do it instead. They would aim to be Cameron to Smith's Howard, having got rid of Corbyn, their IDS

    No-one with a pro-Iraq vote on their Cv could possibly have run against Corbyn, neither could anyone even vaguely on the right of the party. Smith was really just about the only viable candidate. Obviously, that changes if by some miracle Corbyn loses.

    Contrary to Speedy I don't think Smith has done badly at all. He has served his principle purpose, which was to expose Corbyn's manifest, manifold flaws and inability to reach beyond his comgort zone; and Smith has done that. I expect Corbyn to win by around 60% to 40%. I don't expect him to be Labour leader in 2020, though.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,518
    Sandpit said:

    But how many scripts were they doing, a dozen a year? That's only seven grand each, not a lot of cash.
    It bears out my point. £7k a year would have been a handy sum, thirty years ago, but not enough to live on. Hopefully, they did well from the book sales. There are undoubtedly fairly successful writers whose income from writing equates to the hourly minimum wage.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    Since it's the end of August I did a tally of where the Presidential nominees have held rallies and spent on advertising, to see where their campaigns are focusing.

    Hillary
    Rallies:

    Pennsylvania 5
    Ohio 3
    Nevada 3
    Florida 2
    Michigan 2
    Colorado 1
    Nebraska 1
    Iowa 1
    Wisconsin 1
    N.Hampshire 1
    Virginia 1
    N.Carolina 1

    Total 22

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Nevada
    Nebraska
    Iowa
    Ohio
    Pennsylvania
    N.Hampshire
    N.Carolina
    Florida

    Trump
    Rallies:

    Florida 7
    Virginia 6
    N.Carolina 5
    Pennsylvania 4
    Ohio 3
    N.Hampshire 3
    Iowa 3
    Texas 3
    Colorado 2
    Arizona 2
    Maine 1
    Connecticut 1
    N.Jersey 1
    Washington 1
    Nevada 1
    Mississippi 1

    Total 44

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Florida

    You can see Hillary is more focused, spends less time in public and a lot more on TV adverts, it's an old style campaign but it works.
    Her priority is clearly Pennsylvania.

    Trump is a mile wide and an inch deep, and Florida seems to be his priority.

  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    SkyNews
    Update - Kent Police: Bridge on #M20 was brought down after it was struck by a digger on the back of a lorry - the motorway remains closed
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,685
    edited August 2016
    The Purge: PB Stylee - for 12 hours, all AV threads are legal!
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Speedy said:

    Since it's the end of August I did a tally of where the Presidential nominees have held rallies and spent on advertising, to see where their campaigns are focusing.

    Hillary
    Rallies:

    Pennsylvania 5
    Ohio 3
    Nevada 3
    Florida 2
    Michigan 2
    Colorado 1
    Nebraska 1
    Iowa 1
    Wisconsin 1
    N.Hampshire 1
    Virginia 1
    N.Carolina 1

    Total 22

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Nevada
    Nebraska
    Iowa
    Ohio
    Pennsylvania
    N.Hampshire
    N.Carolina
    Florida

    Trump
    Rallies:

    Florida 7
    Virginia 6
    N.Carolina 5
    Pennsylvania 4
    Ohio 3
    N.Hampshire 3
    Iowa 3
    Texas 3
    Colorado 2
    Arizona 2
    Maine 1
    Connecticut 1
    N.Jersey 1
    Washington 1
    Nevada 1
    Mississippi 1

    Total 44

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Florida

    You can see Hillary is more focused, spends less time in public and a lot more on TV adverts, it's an old style campaign but it works.
    Her priority is clearly Pennsylvania.

    Trump is a mile wide and an inch deep, and Florida seems to be his priority.

    Trump can win without Pennsylvania - but not Florida.

    TBH I would have thought that later advertising, concentrating on the opponent's gaffs during the campaign will be much more effective. Clinton is doing the usual socialist meme - spending other people's money until she runs out.
  • Speedy said:

    I think it is TSE.

    The market is so light that any extra betting caused by TSE's article is enough to shift the odds.
    The odds shifted well before my piece, and I'm not sure a market with nearly a million pounds matched can be called light.
  • I some how doubt we will be seeing her at Aston Ham United....
    Alright, Dave?

    "I'm forever blowing Villas" :lol:
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100



    No-one with a pro-Iraq vote on their Cv could possibly have run against Corbyn, neither could anyone even vaguely on the right of the party. Smith was really just about the only viable candidate. Obviously, that changes if by some miracle Corbyn loses.

    Contrary to Speedy I don't think Smith has done badly at all. He has served his principle purpose, which was to expose Corbyn's manifest, manifold flaws and inability to reach beyond his comgort zone; and Smith has done that. I expect Corbyn to win by around 60% to 40%. I don't expect him to be Labour leader in 2020, though.

    Well I think that the campaign proved that Smith is worse than Corbyn on almost every front.

    On TV he comes out as someone completely out of focus like watching paint dry, and he has been a gaffe machine on the TV debates.

    On his campaign trail he can only get an audience if he promises free ice cream.

    He is painfully trying to be on the left of Corbyn (threatening physical violence against the PM, proposing peace talks with ISIS ect), but he manages to present them in a worse manner and unconvincingly at the same time.

    Smith has done a very good job in proving that he is much worse than Corbyn.

    Just like last time there hasn't been someone running that has proven that he/she could be a better leader than Corbyn, so Corbyn wins by default as the least worse option like last year.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,397
    PlatoSaid said:

    SkyNews
    Update - Kent Police: Bridge on #M20 was brought down after it was struck by a digger on the back of a lorry - the motorway remains closed

    Okay, genuinely surprised by that from looking at the early piccies.
  • Speedy said:

    Well I think that the campaign proved that Smith is worse than Corbyn on almost every front.

    On TV he comes out as someone completely out of focus like watching paint dry, and he has been a gaffe machine on the TV debates.

    On his campaign trail he can only get an audience if he promises free ice cream.

    He is painfully trying to be on the left of Corbyn (threatening physical violence against the PM, proposing peace talks with ISIS ect), but he manages to present them in a worse manner and unconvincingly at the same time.

    Smith has done a very good job in proving that he is much worse than Corbyn.

    Just like last time there hasn't been someone running that has proven that he/she could be a better leader than Corbyn, so Corbyn wins by default as the least worse option like last year.

    We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I do agree, though, that Corbyn will win - there is still a lot of anger aimed at the PLP and that will see him through. But his inability to do the job has been exposed to all but his most fanatical hard left supporters.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016

    The odds shifted well before my piece, and I'm not sure a market with nearly a million pounds matched can be called light.
    It's been only a few thousand a day for weeks now, some days much less than a thousand.
    People seem to have lost interest in an outcome they feel is absolutely certain.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,427

    Okay, genuinely surprised by that from looking at the early piccies.
    Not too good at reading pictures but looked to me as though it might have been the height.

    (Good evening, everyone.)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016

    We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I do agree, though, that Corbyn will win - there is still a lot of anger aimed at the PLP and that will see him through. But his inability to do the job has been exposed to all but his most fanatical hard left supporters.

    I don't disagree on that, since the reason I switched my support to Corbyn last year was that although he is not stellar he is definitely the least worse option from all those running.

    And since he is still less worse than Smith, I still support Corbyn.

    I'm asking you is Smith a better candidate that Burnham, Cooper or even Liz Kendall who lost to Corbyn last year ?

    Looking at Owen Smith the answer is no.
    Even Kendall was better at it, even though her policies where unacceptable she did manage to present them in a manner more coherent than Smith.

    Find me a candidate who in my eyes (not TSE's or OGH's) is better, not worse than Corbyn.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Okay, genuinely surprised by that from looking at the early piccies.
    So the works on the bridge were a complete coincidence?
  • DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    edited August 2016
    Speedy said:

    Since it's the end of August I did a tally of where the Presidential nominees have held rallies and spent on advertising, to see where their campaigns are focusing.

    Hillary
    Rallies:

    Pennsylvania 5
    Ohio 3
    Nevada 3
    Florida 2
    Michigan 2
    Colorado 1
    Nebraska 1
    Iowa 1
    Wisconsin 1
    N.Hampshire 1
    Virginia 1
    N.Carolina 1

    Total 22

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Nevada
    Nebraska
    Iowa
    Ohio
    Pennsylvania
    N.Hampshire
    N.Carolina
    Florida

    Trump
    Rallies:

    Florida 7
    Virginia 6
    N.Carolina 5
    Pennsylvania 4
    Ohio 3
    N.Hampshire 3
    Iowa 3
    Texas 3
    Colorado 2
    Arizona 2
    Maine 1
    Connecticut 1
    N.Jersey 1
    Washington 1
    Nevada 1
    Mississippi 1

    Total 44

    Present TV Adverts in:
    Florida

    You can see Hillary is more focused, spends less time in public and a lot more on TV adverts, it's an old style campaign but it works.
    Her priority is clearly Pennsylvania.

    Trump is a mile wide and an inch deep, and Florida seems to be his priority.

    Their respective choices of where to hold rallies, though, seem to be similar and also, contrary to what some have said about Trump's campaigning, fairly standard, covering the states that the Democrats won by small percentages last election. The main conclusion I'd draw from your data is that Trump hasn't placed many ads on the TV yet. Which maybe isn't surprising given how much coverage he's had in the news programmes. As fraudster Conrad Black (no fool when it comes to the political use of the media) said,

    "Trump will carpet-bomb the country in September and October with a billion dollars of reminders of Benghazi [...], the televised apology to the world’s Muslims, the FBI director’s non-indictment indictment; the malodorous conflicts of the Clinton Foundation entwined with the Clinton State Department. Even Whitewater is due for a rerun."

    And that picture of Clinton being helped up the steps will lose her votes, even if, as could well be the case, it's a trick of the camera and is misleading. Certainly if enough photos are taken of someone it's usually easy to make them look trustworthy, confident, smarmy or a miserable git, according to what's desired. Seeming to need help to walk up steps is to her disadvantage, and it will be capitalised upon by an opponent who routinely calls her a "LIAR" and a "CROOK" etc. I don't have any sympathy for those who say they will vote for Trump primarily because they want to stop Clinton, but there seem to be lots of them about.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Just switched on the cricket highlights on Five to find a shot of Geoff Boycott in animated conversation with Theresa May in the stands.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867
    edited August 2016
    AndyJS said:

    Just switched on the cricket highlights on Five to find a shot of Geoff Boycott in animated conversation with Theresa May in the stands.

    Did he ask her when she's going to push the red button (A 50) ? :smiley:
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Speedy said:

    I don't disagree on that, since the reason I switched my support to Corbyn last year was that although he is not stellar he is definitely the least worse option from all those running.

    And since he is still less worse than Smith, I still support Corbyn.

    I'm asking you is Smith a better candidate that Burnham, Cooper or even Liz Kendall who lost to Corbyn last year ?

    Looking at Owen Smith the answer is no.
    Even Kendall was better at it, even though her policies where unacceptable she did manage to present them in a manner more coherent than Smith.

    Find me a candidate who in my eyes (not TSE's or OGH's) is better, not worse than Corbyn.
    Yvette Cooper.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095

    Best odds on Smith are now 5/1. Two weeks ago you could get 7/1. 5/1 still seems far too long. Maybe 5/1 would be right if we had a string of opinion polls out tomorrow all showing around 55%-45% to Corbyn, but given that we've been in a polling vacuum in August there isn't enough certainty to warrant odds that long.
    I am certainly tempted to put some money on Smith but am waiting for a members' vote first
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,397
    Sandpit said:

    So the works on the bridge were a complete coincidence?
    God knows.

    From the photos I've seen of the digger and trailer, I wouldn't have said it'd hit anything. But what do I know? ;)

    I wonder what side point loadings (i.e. impacts from traffic) the bridge had been designed for.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095

    No-one with a pro-Iraq vote on their Cv could possibly have run against Corbyn, neither could anyone even vaguely on the right of the party. Smith was really just about the only viable candidate. Obviously, that changes if by some miracle Corbyn loses.

    Contrary to Speedy I don't think Smith has done badly at all. He has served his principle purpose, which was to expose Corbyn's manifest, manifold flaws and inability to reach beyond his comgort zone; and Smith has done that. I expect Corbyn to win by around 60% to 40%. I don't expect him to be Labour leader in 2020, though.

    Indeed Smith has done a fair job considering he was one of only 2 with the balls to take on Corbyn, I think it will be close but need a poll to confirm
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,188
    Paging TSE....

    Thanks for the Billions tip - it is tremendous telly.

    And I've just seen the RS book - sadly looks like a retrospective on the architect....

    :)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Paging Tim B

    @NFL: Tony Romo has a broken bone in his back: https://t.co/Ey20Pr5cDC https://t.co/gXmrrf6OK7
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    The link speaks for itself:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/27/prime-minister-theresa-may-spotted-watching-england-vs-pakistan/

    The PM watching the cricket, hopeful in itself as long as she doesn't follow the fate of another recent cricket-fan PM.

    I bet she couldn't face 6 balls from Murali,
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Dromedary said:


    Their respective choices of where to hold rallies, though, seem to be similar and also, contrary to what some have said about Trump's campaigning, fairly standard, covering the states that the Democrats won by small percentages last election. The main conclusion I'd draw from your data is that Trump hasn't placed many ads on the TV yet. Which maybe isn't surprising given how much coverage he's had in the news programmes. As fraudster Conrad Black (no fool when it comes to the political use of the media) said,

    "Trump will carpet-bomb the country in September and October with a billion dollars of reminders of Benghazi [...], the televised apology to the world’s Muslims, the FBI director’s non-indictment indictment; the malodorous conflicts of the Clinton Foundation entwined with the Clinton State Department. Even Whitewater is due for a rerun."

    And that picture of Clinton being helped up the steps will lose her votes, even if, as could well be the case, it's a trick of the camera and is misleading. Certainly if enough photos are taken of someone it's usually easy to make them look trustworthy, confident, smarmy or a miserable git, according to what's desired. Seeming to need help to walk up steps is to her disadvantage, and it will be capitalised upon by an opponent who routinely calls her a "LIAR" and a "CROOK" etc. I don't have any sympathy for those who say they will vote for Trump primarily because they want to stop Clinton, but there seem to be lots of them about.

    No, I believe Trump's strategy of ignoring TV advertising is wrong, by estimation from Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group, 95% of journalists in america hate Trump.

    If 95% of journalists hate your guts you are going to get 95% hostile and negative coverage from the media, the only way to counter that is A. Rallies B. Your own TV advertising message.

    By doing rallies though he is exposing himself to danger through gaffes and going off message, you need discipline.
    By doing TV ads he can control his message by remote.

    And the later he waits the more expensive it gets to get your ads on TV.

    Hillary who has fought elections every 4 years since 1964 knows how to do it:

    Avoid the media as much as possible.
    Avoid the public as much as possible.
    Get as many journalists, editors and producers on her payroll as possible, to make the TV shows fawn about her.
    Spend massively on TV ads as early as possible.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    I don't disagree on that, since the reason I switched my support to Corbyn last year was that although he is not stellar he is definitely the least worse option from all those running.

    And since he is still less worse than Smith, I still support Corbyn.

    I'm asking you is Smith a better candidate that Burnham, Cooper or even Liz Kendall who lost to Corbyn last year ?

    Looking at Owen Smith the answer is no.
    Even Kendall was better at it, even though her policies where unacceptable she did manage to present them in a manner more coherent than Smith.

    Find me a candidate who in my eyes (not TSE's or OGH's) is better, not worse than Corbyn.
    Kendall got just 5%, Burnham and Cooper were tainted by the Blair and Brown governments, Smith is a better candidate than all of them as he was not part of the old regimes, first entering the Labour frontbench under Ed Miliband and is not a Blairite unlike Kendall. I expect a much closer result
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    surbiton said:

    Yvette Cooper.
    Switched from Cooper to Corbyn last year, try someone else.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    No, I believe Trump's strategy of ignoring TV advertising is wrong, by estimation from Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group, 95% of journalists in america hate Trump.

    If 95% of journalists hate your guts you are going to get 95% hostile and negative coverage from the media, the only way to counter that is A. Rallies B. Your own TV advertising message.

    By doing rallies though he is exposing himself to danger through gaffes and going off message, you need discipline.
    By doing TV ads he can control his message by remote.

    And the later he waits the more expensive it gets to get your ads on TV.

    Hillary who has fought elections every 4 years since 1964 knows how to do it:

    Avoid the media as much as possible.
    Avoid the public as much as possible.
    Get as many journalists, editors and producers on her payroll as possible, to make the TV shows fawn about her.
    Spend massively on TV ads as early as possible.
    Trump will pour money into ads after labor day and then aim to beat Hillary in the debates when she will be in the full glare of the media
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Speedy said:

    Switched from Cooper to Corbyn last year, try someone else.
    Why should I ? I want Labour to win.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    Switched from Cooper to Corbyn last year, try someone else.
    Virtually anyone on the Labour benches, including Dennis Skinner
  • Mortimer said:

    Paging TSE....

    Thanks for the Billions tip - it is tremendous telly.

    And I've just seen the RS book - sadly looks like a retrospective on the architect....

    :)

    Glad you liked it. I binged watched the first season in a couple of days.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    surbiton said:



    Why should I ? I want Labour to win.

    Cooper was talking about the need to elect her because of her gender not because of her merits.
    Corbyn made a more persuasive case.

    I believe that women and men, whites and blacks, christians or muslims should be judged equally, and not by their gender, their skin colour or their religion.

    That's why although Cooper was a woman I rated Corbyn higher as a person.
    And that's also why I believe Chuka Umunna is as bad as Tristram Hunt, despite the fact that they have different skin colour.

    And Smith is still worse than Corbyn by any metric you can apply.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Scott_P said:

    Paging Tim B

    @NFL: Tony Romo has a broken bone in his back: https://t.co/Ey20Pr5cDC https://t.co/gXmrrf6OK7

    So is Prescott (no, not THAT Prescott, Dak not John) going to save the season for the Cowboys.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,312
    Sean_F said:

    ...It bears out my point. £7k a year would have been a handy sum, thirty years ago, but not enough to live on...

    (I need to preface this reply by saying this is not a crack at you Sean_F, or the people you were talking to: damn nearly everybody exhibits this behavior, and it's driving me crazy)

    I am constantly taken aback by people's inability to grasp or handle money or how it changes. Let's pick a date of, say, 1985. It's before the Lawson boom and after the miner's strike and the Brighton bomb, so things are reasonably settled. A two-bed terrace in a large town in England outside Greater London would have gone for around £20-25K. £7K would have been a good graduate salary. Today's equivalents would be around £30K for the same salary and £150-200K for the same house.

    So yes, £7K would have been enough to live on.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    HYUFD said:

    Virtually anyone on the Labour benches, including Dennis Skinner
    Give me a name not an abstract, Skinner is 84 years old, probably too old to serve a term as leader.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    edited August 2016
    Speedy said:

    Give me a name not an abstract, Skinner is 84 years old, probably too old to serve a term as leader.
    Umunna and Jarvis obviously, Smith, Field abd Hoey even McDonnell, virtually anyone really

  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,427
    Speedy said:

    Give me a name not an abstract, Skinner is 84 years old, probably too old to serve a term as leader.
    I like the probably - respect!
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:



    Kendall got just 5%, Burnham and Cooper were tainted by the Blair and Brown governments, Smith is a better candidate than all of them as he was not part of the old regimes, first entering the Labour frontbench under Ed Miliband and is not a Blairite unlike Kendall. I expect a much closer result

    Yes Kendall got 5%, but if Smith was running last year he might have come last instead.

    I seriously believe than Angela Eagle would have been a better campaigner than Smith although she would still have lost because of her policies.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,518
    edited August 2016
    viewcode said:

    (I need to preface this reply by saying this is not a crack at you Sean_F, or the people you were talking to: damn nearly everybody exhibits this behavior, and it's driving me crazy)

    I am constantly taken aback by people's inability to grasp or handle money or how it changes. Let's pick a date of, say, 1985. It's before the Lawson boom and after the miner's strike and the Brighton bomb, so things are reasonably settled. A two-bed terrace in a large town in England outside Greater London would have gone for around £20-25K. £7K would have been a good graduate salary. Today's equivalents would be around £30K for the same salary and £150-200K for the same house.

    So yes, £7K would have been enough to live on.

    Fair enough, I would have assumed the equivalent would be about £18k today. It's easy to forget just how prices and wages change.

    Edit: and of course, plenty of people live on £18k today, but it's unlikely an author would view it as enough to live on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,538
    edited August 2016
    Sean_F said:

    Fair enough, I would have assumed the equivalent would be about £18k today. It's easy to forget just how prices and wages change.
    1985 £7k -> £20300.00 to be exact. But around then significant inflation, so you only have to go back 3-4 years and £7k then, is £30k today.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Speedy said:

    Yes Kendall got 5%, but if Smith was running last year he might have come last instead.

    I seriously believe than Angela Eagle would have been a better campaigner than Smith although she would still have lost because of her policies.
    No, Kendall was a Blairite, Smith is a Kinnockite. Eagle is decent but crashingly dull, Smith at least has some energy, Eagle's backing for the Iraq War would have doomed her anyway
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    <

    Umunna and Jarvis obviously, Smith, even McDonnell, virtually anyone really

    Umunna and Jarvis are unacceptable.
    McDonnell perhaps, he has been tested as shadow chancellor and he is not a backstabber.

    You see the pool of acceptable candidates is small, they should not be backstabbers, they need to be competent enough, their policies palatable, and to be good campaigners.

    Smith strikes only one or none ( some policies perhaps ?) of the above 4.
This discussion has been closed.