Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Last night’s by election results.

SystemSystem Posts: 12,598
edited September 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Last night’s by election results.

Last night's council by-elections: LDEM gain from UKIP; CON gain from LAB; three CON holds https://t.co/dPyiwIqJ3O pic.twitter.com/tPm692aj7v

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    1st like the Tories?
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215
    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,487
    Third like the SNP
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    The FTSE 100 has posted a storming end to the week with its 150 point rise. The London market was aided by disappointing job figures in the US that send the dollar lower."

    Why would the FTSE be up because of a lower dollar, is it because it means a rate hike in the U.S is less likely?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/latinos-trump-founder-warns-taco-trucks-every-corner-n641976
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    nunu said:

    The FTSE 100 has posted a storming end to the week with its 150 point rise. The London market was aided by disappointing job figures in the US that send the dollar lower."

    Why would the FTSE be up because of a lower dollar, is it because it means a rate hike in the U.S is less likely?

    Yes broadly. The methadone of cheap money continues to keep the stock markets highish.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,998
    Sandpit said:

    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
    I'm a bit blasé about Ukip, but I voted for the person I think is most likely to give Ukip a new direction post-Brexit. Whether or not I'm inclined to vote for that party is another matter. But I don't think it will be healthy for our democracy to only have one party that is worth voting for.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    edited September 2016
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
    I'm a bit blasé about Ukip, but I voted for the person I think is most likely to give Ukip a new direction post-Brexit. Whether or not I'm inclined to vote for that party is another matter. But I don't think it will be healthy for our democracy to only have one party that is worth voting for.
    Agree completely. In the absence of a functioning Labour Party and following the collapse of the LDs, there is a big gap for another party to fill, if only for voters to have more of a choice. Having only one party that appeals to the majority of the electorate isn't healthy, a Parliamentary democracy requires a serviceable Opposition to hold the government to account.

    It will only take a couple of populist moves to the centre by Mrs May (planning reform, tax cuts) to see the Tories heading towards 50% if the UKIP vote continues to fall.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,378
    nunu said:

    The FTSE 100 has posted a storming end to the week with its 150 point rise. The London market was aided by disappointing job figures in the US that send the dollar lower."

    Why would the FTSE be up because of a lower dollar, is it because it means a rate hike in the U.S is less likely?

    Yes, markets reacting to a lower likelihood of a rate rise, especially with Yellen.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Times story followed by 'oh shit' moment, archive deletion

    On 2 March, 2015, the New York Times published a story with the headline, “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.”

    Later that month, a Clinton aide told the FBI in an interview summarized in today’s documents, he “had an ‘oh shit’ moment and ..deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton’s emails.”

    — Chris Cillizza (@TheFix)
    September 2, 2016

    This is crazy. 3 weeks after NYT publish Clinton email server story, there was a big wipe of her emails conducted pic.twitter.com/tlO0KJWYgz
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,365
    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    How can you make that conclusion from these results? There seems to be little obvious correlation unless I'm reading the tables incorrectly.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    old_labour said:

    Times story followed by 'oh shit' moment, archive deletion

    On 2 March, 2015, the New York Times published a story with the headline, “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.”

    Later that month, a Clinton aide told the FBI in an interview summarized in today’s documents, he “had an ‘oh shit’ moment and ..deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton’s emails.”

    — Chris Cillizza (@TheFix)
    September 2, 2016

    This is crazy. 3 weeks after NYT publish Clinton email server story, there was a big wipe of her emails conducted pic.twitter.com/tlO0KJWYgz

    I think Chris Cillizza has it out for Hillary (more power to his elbow). He breaks the most damning stories about her, and is often well ahead of the pack in doing so.

    TheFix is his column/blog at the Washington Post, for those not in the know. So he is a serious journalist taken seriously.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    You've got to think he might have a point here:
    https://twitter.com/SpeakerRyan/status/771773253140541440
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Charlie Speirling
    Lots of things Hillary Clinton "did not recall” about email habits as Secretary of State https://t.co/vrFQGgmQjA? https://t.co/Xj5eW5xptA
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    MTimT said:

    old_labour said:

    Times story followed by 'oh shit' moment, archive deletion

    On 2 March, 2015, the New York Times published a story with the headline, “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.”

    Later that month, a Clinton aide told the FBI in an interview summarized in today’s documents, he “had an ‘oh shit’ moment and ..deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton’s emails.”

    — Chris Cillizza (@TheFix)
    September 2, 2016

    This is crazy. 3 weeks after NYT publish Clinton email server story, there was a big wipe of her emails conducted pic.twitter.com/tlO0KJWYgz

    I think Chris Cillizza has it out for Hillary (more power to his elbow). He breaks the most damning stories about her, and is often well ahead of the pack in doing so.

    TheFix is his column/blog at the Washington Post, for those not in the know. So he is a serious journalist taken seriously.
    He's one of my favourites. Funny and fast and sharp. Like Andrew Neil.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Sandpit said:

    You've got to think he might have a point here:
    https://twitter.com/SpeakerRyan/status/771773253140541440

    Hillary allies also agree:

    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/771780461282594816
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Map comparison

    The Johnson Landslide – In 1964, Lyndon B. Johnson won the US... https://t.co/wexWVujG6L #maps https://t.co/UMvWgOsUru
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    It does not get any better.

    Report: Hillary Clinton's staff smashed old Blackberrys with a hammer

    From the Associated Press:

    Clinton and her legal team deleted thousands more emails she claimed were personal and private. The FBI report details steps taken by Clinton’s staff that appear intended to hamper the recovery of deleted data, including smashing her old Blackberry smartphones with a hammer and using special software to wipe the hard drive of a server she had used.

    Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said Friday the campaign was pleased the FBI had released the documents.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/sep/02/clinton-trump-national-security-drug-prices-election-live?page=with:block-57c9e0e6e4b0c2a396c06a6b#block-57c9e0e6e4b0c2a396c06a6b
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited September 2016
    Hillary's excuse was that she had a blood clot in her head and can't remember what happened, very convenient but it plays into the theme that she is too ill to do the job of President:

    https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/771787369586515968

    She can claim that due to her bad health she didn't knew what was happening:
    https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/771792047560859648
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    old_labour said:

    It does not get any better.

    Report: Hillary Clinton's staff smashed old Blackberrys with a hammer

    From the Associated Press:

    Clinton and her legal team deleted thousands more emails she claimed were personal and private. The FBI report details steps taken by Clinton’s staff that appear intended to hamper the recovery of deleted data, including smashing her old Blackberry smartphones with a hammer and using special software to wipe the hard drive of a server she had used.

    Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said Friday the campaign was pleased the FBI had released the documents.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/sep/02/clinton-trump-national-security-drug-prices-election-live?page=with:block-57c9e0e6e4b0c2a396c06a6b#block-57c9e0e6e4b0c2a396c06a6b

    :lol::lol::lol:
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    This story reminds me of Watergate if Nixon had ordered the destruction of the tapes instead of giving them to the prosecutors.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Edward Isaac Dover
    Think about where we are that a pledge for a president to hold press conferences is a headline https://t.co/T5GAMD84dg
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Oh dear me

    Great catch by @JerylBier: Was Hillary briefed about the nature of classified info or not? https://t.co/FDxSLod0mU https://t.co/1PsyG5ZE3F
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    The Daily Caller
    FBI: We Can’t Locate More Than A Dozen Hillary Devices https://t.co/3yInz6Esnl https://t.co/fTO91U0nOh
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    edited September 2016
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    PlatoSaid said:

    Oh dear me

    Great catch by @JerylBier: Was Hillary briefed about the nature of classified info or not? https://t.co/FDxSLod0mU https://t.co/1PsyG5ZE3F

    Of course she was briefed, she was the Secretary of State!

    She's either completely incompetent, lying through her teeth or has a mental health problem. None of which are suitable traits for a Presidential candidate.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    edited September 2016
    If the Republicans had somebody who wasn't pushing racist agenda at every opportunity and was vaguely decent (no not the clowns who went up against Trump), Hilton would be in big big trouble.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Sandpit said:

    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
    Unless freedom of movement is ended completely, UKIP will still have a purpose
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Oh dear me

    Great catch by @JerylBier: Was Hillary briefed about the nature of classified info or not? https://t.co/FDxSLod0mU https://t.co/1PsyG5ZE3F

    Of course she was briefed, she was the Secretary of State!

    She's either completely incompetent, lying through her teeth or has a mental health problem. None of which are suitable traits for a Presidential candidate.
    This is enormously entertaining. I've lol several times this evening already.

    Seeing some Hillary supporters saying 'whats the fuss?' just adds to the mirth.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    At least someone is sticking by Hillary!
    https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/771801270113935360
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Whitehouse Press Corps
    RT @jamestaranto: When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like email.

    :smiley:
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    Well we are back in the area of Hillary being either a crook or incompetent.

    Since we talked a lot about Yes Minister this week, it's like one of those episodes where Humphrey was caught and had to either plead guilty or plead incompetence and get fired.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Byron York
    Again, if you want to read FBI Clinton documents--and you should--here is link: https://t.co/BMLxbN15eq
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
    I'm a bit blasé about Ukip, but I voted for the person I think is most likely to give Ukip a new direction post-Brexit. Whether or not I'm inclined to vote for that party is another matter. But I don't think it will be healthy for our democracy to only have one party that is worth voting for.
    Broughton is a risk, but could be a real anti-establishment politician rather than a similcrum of one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If the Republicans had somebody who wasn't pushing racist agenda at every opportunity and was vaguely decent (no not the clowns who went up against Trump), Hilton would be in big big trouble.

    Paul Ryan is probably thinking to himself why did he sit it out.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Sandpit said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If the Republicans had somebody who wasn't pushing racist agenda at every opportunity and was vaguely decent (no not the clowns who went up against Trump), Hilton would be in big big trouble.

    Paul Ryan is probably thinking to himself why did he sit it out.
    You really think Ryan would have done better against Trump in the primaries than the rest of the Republican roadkill?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Do they not expect everyone to be celibate if they're not married?
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    Well we are back in the area of Hillary being either a crook or incompetent.

    Since we talked a lot about Yes Minister this week, it's like one of those episodes where Humphrey was caught and had to either plead guilty or plead incompetence and get fired.
    One of Us with Benji

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLD0YK6CdjE
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited September 2016
    You know it's very bad when it's released on a friday before a major US holiday and because of the amount of redactions and differences between what Hillary said and what the FBI found:
    https://twitter.com/bad_bad_bernie/status/771814690787733505
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    williamglenn said:

    Sandpit said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If the Republicans had somebody who wasn't pushing racist agenda at every opportunity and was vaguely decent (no not the clowns who went up against Trump), Hilton would be in big big trouble.

    Paul Ryan is probably thinking to himself why did he sit it out.
    You really think Ryan would have done better against Trump in the primaries than the rest of the Republican roadkill?
    I'm not sure any of them knew what to do with Trump - it was very much like the Labour contest last year with Corbyn, the whole party thought the guy was an idiot, but the members went for him and his support is fanatical.

    Ryan would probably have run Trump closer than any of the others, not that that would have been too difficult given the bunch that did stand.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    Indeed, 50 million women eligible to stand as POTUS and they choose this one. As for Trump!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,998
    foxinsoxuk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    DanSmith said:

    UKIP to Tory switchers is a definite thing isn't it.

    It's going to be an interesting group of voters to watch in the next couple of years. If UKIP can reorganise under a new leader and appeal to the WWC abandoned by Labour they've got a good chance of a hatful of MPs next time around, otherwise they will probably wind up, having achieved their raison d'être.
    I'm a bit blasé about Ukip, but I voted for the person I think is most likely to give Ukip a new direction post-Brexit. Whether or not I'm inclined to vote for that party is another matter. But I don't think it will be healthy for our democracy to only have one party that is worth voting for.
    Broughton is a risk, but could be a real anti-establishment politician rather than a similcrum of one.
    To be honest I've never heard the guy speak. My vote was based purely on his leaflet that struck a chord with the sort of things we've discussed on here about the future of the party. I'm not an active member of the party so I don't have any feel for how the grassroots view the candidates. Diane James appears to be dodging hustings which won't do her any good.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Happy birthday to Harry Hayfield.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    The Bishops want to endorse gay marriage, and are quite keen on Sharia law too. So, presumably, they favour polygamy as well.

    Persuading the clergy and laity may be hard.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    SimonStClare said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    Indeed, 50 million women eligible to stand as POTUS and they choose this one. As for Trump!
    Trump should say something like, "The election of the first female President will be a great milestone for our country and she will be a role model for millions of women for generations to come. We can't let Hillary Clinton be that woman."
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    The Bishops want to endorse gay marriage, and are quite keen on Sharia law too. So, presumably, they favour polygamy as well.

    Persuading the clergy and laity may be hard.
    The bishops are appointed by secular politicians - that is the whole point of the C of E since 1547. Give a passable resemblence of catholicism while pushing the establisments agenda.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    Which is which?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    Its odd how these releases on Clinton always seem to happen when there is a holiday weekend.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    Pretty much. No drama Obama is going to look sensational in hindsight. Way better than he deserves.
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    another british institution broken by Dave Cameron!

    (I'm all in favour of gay marriage, just to be clear)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    A bit like Brexit.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    The Bishops want to endorse gay marriage, and are quite keen on Sharia law too. So, presumably, they favour polygamy as well.

    Persuading the clergy and laity may be hard.
    The bishops are appointed by secular politicians - that is the whole point of the C of E since 1547. Give a passable resemblence of catholicism while pushing the establisments agenda.
    I left the C of E when I realised it was Corbynism with smells and bells.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    A bit like Brexit.
    No, Brexit was more like choosing between South Devon and a neo-brutalist housing estate in East Berlin.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    A bit like Brexit.
    LEAVE 52%
    REMAIN 48%

    :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    Well they both won the primaries
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    The Bishops want to endorse gay marriage, and are quite keen on Sharia law too. So, presumably, they favour polygamy as well.

    Persuading the clergy and laity may be hard.
    Indeed, the Bishops may end up leading a Church most of whose remaining congregation have gone elsewhere
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    dugarbandier said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    another british institution broken by Dave Cameron!

    (I'm all in favour of gay marriage, just to be clear)
    There is no reason secular law and religious principle need to be the same
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    A bit like Brexit.
    Yes, Brexit is like sticking your head in a bucket of shit. Bit of an immediate shock, unpleasant in the short term but you can go get a shower clean yourself up and you will be fine.

    Voting remain would have been like sticking your head in a bucket of acid. Searing pain as everything you hold dear is slowly dissolved into a dull grey featureless mass and no hope of ever recovering.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    HYUFD said:

    dugarbandier said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    another british institution broken by Dave Cameron!

    (I'm all in favour of gay marriage, just to be clear)
    There is no reason secular law and religious principle need to be the same
    Not here since 1536.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Ben Whitelaw
    This wouldn't look out of place in an episode of Homeland https://t.co/jJt0snZvXQ #Syria
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    Sean_F said:

    williamglenn said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    A choice between sticking your head in bucket of shit or a bucket of acid.
    A bit like Brexit.
    No, Brexit was more like choosing between South Devon and a neo-brutalist housing estate in East Berlin.
    Although, I could show you some interesting housing blocks in Paignton....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    HYUFD said:

    dugarbandier said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/nicholas-chamberlain-bishop-of-grantham-c-of-e-gay-relationship

    The church really need to change. Not the gay aspect, but the nonsense that this guy can be in relationship but supposed to remain celibate. If the church is happy for him to be in relationship, surely they should also be happy for him not to be celibate.

    Already traditionalists are threatening to break away and form their own Church if the C of E endorses gay marriage, if it did a split is inevitable
    another british institution broken by Dave Cameron!

    (I'm all in favour of gay marriage, just to be clear)
    There is no reason secular law and religious principle need to be the same
    Not here since 1536.
    Indeed
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    Well we are back in the area of Hillary being either a crook or incompetent.
    That will be Trump's killer line in the debates.

    "So, Hillary, which is it?"
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    MarqueeMark said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    Well we are back in the area of Hillary being either a crook or incompetent.
    That will be Trump's killer line in the debates.

    "So, Hillary, which is it?"
    Plenty of skeletons in the Trump cupboard too. It is going to be the lowest level of politics.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
    A decision that looks ever more questionable.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    nunu said:

    The FTSE 100 has posted a storming end to the week with its 150 point rise. The London market was aided by disappointing job figures in the US that send the dollar lower."

    Why would the FTSE be up because of a lower dollar, is it because it means a rate hike in the U.S is less likely?

    Yes.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    Well they both won the primaries
    Both of the main party candidates are terrible, by any objective analysis.

    but it has given third party candidates like Johnson there best shot in a long time, and it has led to at least this good video/initiative, that made be LOL.

    http://balancedrebellion.com/

    I highly recommend it, even just for the giggles.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
    A decision that looks ever more questionable.
    Indeed but a decision that has already been made
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    edited September 2016
    https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
    A decision that looks ever more questionable.
    Crooked Hillary!
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2016
    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Oh dear me

    Great catch by @JerylBier: Was Hillary briefed about the nature of classified info or not? https://t.co/FDxSLod0mU https://t.co/1PsyG5ZE3F

    Of course she was briefed, she was the Secretary of State!

    She's either completely incompetent, lying through her teeth or has a mental health problem. None of which are suitable traits for a Presidential candidate.
    She has been First Lady, US senator, Secretary of State in the US Government amongst others posts and she has to be briefed and then could not recollect security classifications or what "C" means.,

    It's bollocks and they treat us like fools .,Hopefully America knows it as well......

    "What's this big red button for ? I am sure I was briefed something to do with getting help when in the bathroom??"

    *presses button*

    Oops!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    BigRich said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    It's desperate. How broke is US politics when it creates a choice like this?
    Well they both won the primaries
    Both of the main party candidates are terrible, by any objective analysis.

    but it has given third party candidates like Johnson there best shot in a long time, and it has led to at least this good video/initiative, that made be LOL.

    http://balancedrebellion.com/

    I highly recommend it, even just for the giggles.
    A race between a corrupt and a crazy president sums it up
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    With a hammer?
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    As we have seen before it's not necessarily the action that gets you its commonly the cover up.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
    A decision that looks ever more questionable.
    Indeed but a decision that has already been made
    They might have to unmake it if they can find the "smoking hammer"
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    President Trump. Gulp.

    On the plus side my bet might come in I suppose.

    I can't see this making that much difference, those who are concerned about Hillary's abysmal recordkeeping and complete lack of concern for security will already be voting Trump and those voting for Hillary will be voting largely to keep out Trump not with much enthusiasm for her
    I don't know. President Trump is a scary thought but I really could not vote for this woman to be President. She is borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy.

    What a choice.
    Trump is definitely borderline delusional and completely untrustworthy, that is the choice America faces, as I said it is Nixon v Wallace
    What if Nixon was uncovered for Watergate before the election, instead of after ?
    Watergate actually began before the 1972 election but given his opponent was McGovern he still won anyway and Hillary's email revelations have been going on for months and of course the FBI has already taken the decision not to press charges
    A decision that looks ever more questionable.
    Indeed but a decision that has already been made
    They might have to unmake it if they can find the "smoking hammer"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxWTDcP9Y5E
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    Does the same go for private email servers? :p
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    I found the ideal tweet for HYUFD:

    https://twitter.com/0ryuge/status/771802431655075840
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    With a hammer?
    Perhaps Clinton just loved her 1990s rap. With each dead device, she would yell "It's Hammer time!"
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    With a hammer?
    Who knew that this Ted Cruz ad from the primaries was actually what Hillary did for real:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FECIYlo3KRY
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    MTimT said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    With a hammer?
    Perhaps Clinton just loved her 1990s rap. With each dead device, she would yell "It's Hammer time!"
    You can't touch this me!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Speedy said:

    I found the ideal tweet for HYUFD:

    https://twitter.com/0ryuge/status/771802431655075840

    That is the presidency America still is most likely to look forward to, goodnight
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    I wonder if this guy is related to Hillary

    CPA claims bad eyesight caused him to seek sex with 13-year-old boy
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Alistair said:

    SimonStClare said:

    williamglenn said:

    ttps://twitter.com/lachlan/status/771759512101457920

    Of which 2 were destroyed and 11 not found.

    Erased file, smashed/lost devices – looks like a systemic cover up by Hilary and her team.
    Old phones of executive level government peeps should always destoyed. The issue here was they were destroyed at the wrong time.
    With a hammer?
    Lol.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    https://twitter.com/MattMackowiak/status/771847266365640704
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Arm And Hammer!
    image
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    old_labour said:

    Arm And Hammer!
    image

    Best one yet. :D
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Edmund vanquishes Isner at Flushing Meadows.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025