Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » First post-grammar school phone poll sees TMay’s ratings sl

245

Comments

  • Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    There is talk of a tax aimed at (basically) Google News but affecting everyone, including pb.com https://openmedia.org/en/leak-eu-commission-points-link-tax-and-internet-censorship. Separately, there is the "right to be forgotten" legislation whereby you can ask Google not to throw up your name in search results, and separately again there is the ridiculous cookie law. The thought of escaping any more of that kind of nonsense goes a long way towards reconciling me to brexit.
  • Mr. Urquhart, look, we've all had Black Death. I don't get why the media are so het up about it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    nunu said:

    How long before they raise it to 0.6% I wonder?
    Well, we're 10 weeks into the 12 weeks of Q3, so much of the data is already in. My guess is that we'll end up at 0.4 or 0.5%, simply because consumption has been so strong.

    That being said; the UK economy's reliance on consumption is its achilles heel. We spend too much and save too little. UK plc has gone from being a net creditor (i.e. the world owes us money) to being a net debtor over the last 30 years. With a current account deficit of 7% in the first half of this year, that will continue to worsen. It's a trend that cannot continue indefinitely, and - once Brexit is out the way - needs to be a key focus for Hammond and May.
  • Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia

    A bit harsh, if HRC’s own doctor can’t keep up with the latest spin line, why should Bill...?
  • RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/lack-of-brexit-effects-proves-brexit-has-not-yet-happened-20160915113825

    RobD said:

    weejonnie said:

    A few more polls released of 538 - all of which say that its a tie (Hillary's overall lead down to 2% (lowest was 1.7). Donald's chance still South of 40% but getting closer)

    Isn't this the point at which Americans are supposed to start waking up and paying attention to politics, post-Labor Day? "Oh look" says America, "the Democrats have picked an old lady who has to be thrown into a van..."
    Two words: Demographics, ground game.

    But, if she faints or stumbles during the Debate then it's over and we need those nuclear shelters in our gardens.
    Wasn't there talk about a sensational ground game on here in a previous race?... titters
    Yes, but that was a load of untargeted feel good bollocks. Obama's targeting operation was so good that the software that underpinned it was commercialised and is widely used in business. They literally tagged every single voter in the United States with a likelyhood to vote and likelyhood to go Democrat value. 5-10,000 person polls every week, per state in the swing states.

    And I've seen enough anecdotes about 2016 to say that Hilary's operation is an upgrade.
    And yet she's struggling in the polls.
    Marketing and organisation can help you win if people like what you are selling. As John Harris' trip to Stoke showed, Labour had lots of people on the ground but the voters didn't like what they were selling (the EU)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Ishmael_X said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    There is talk of a tax aimed at (basically) Google News but affecting everyone, including pb.com https://openmedia.org/en/leak-eu-commission-points-link-tax-and-internet-censorship. Separately, there is the "right to be forgotten" legislation whereby you can ask Google not to throw up your name in search results, and separately again there is the ridiculous cookie law. The thought of escaping any more of that kind of nonsense goes a long way towards reconciling me to brexit.
    At least when we have left the EU by 2019 no one in Britain will have to worry about following the EU directives.
  • AndyJS said:
    So Jeremy is a LEAVER after all!

    *perks up*
    AndyJS said:
    Doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'decisive'.
    It was decisive.
    decisive
    dɪˈsʌɪsɪv
    adjective
    1.
    settling an issue; producing a definite result.
    "the archers played a decisive part in the victory"
    The issue has been settled as we have a definitive result that we are leaving. There is no way that wasn't decisive.

    Unless you don't understand the meaning of the word 'decisive'.
  • MaxPB said:

    Interesting to consider whether Trump or Clinton is more toxic. I'd guess the former.

    That may have implications for shy support.

    I think there is definitely an element of that.
    Look at the latest NBC poll, it puts support for Hillary with black people at under 90% for the first time in a while, Trump on 6%, how many of the DKs are just shy Trump supporters?

    I honestly think his, you've got nothing to lose, pitch is going to work. It might take a bit of time but there is no effective way of combating it from the Clinton camp. Telling people who feel like they have nothing to lose that they do will just infuriate them further and drive them furthet into the camp of the person who says he might do better. I remember having these arguments with assorted leftists about the chances of the WWC in the north voting to leave even though the pitch was being made by Nigel, Boris and the likes of Bill Cash, none of whom give a shit about the NHS or public services. It feels a lot like that again.
    I have been saying for a good while that this election is Brexit 2.0.

    The point about shy black trump voters is a very good one.

    The problem liberals have is that they see all grades of racism as basically full on nazism.

    A lot of black people will see it for what it is, a spectrum and just as with aspergers/autism the spectrum ranges from you would hardly notice to mentally incapable even of going to the loo unaided so racism ranges from people who might use offensive words without much thought as to why they are offensive to those who think black people are inferior.

    Anyone black who thinks trump is like the latter wont vote for him. Anyone who thinks he is the former will use it as one consideration that can be outweighed by others.

    And as anyone who has spent time in Africa or with African Americans can tell you - they sure aint Islington Liberal Guardian readers - in fact they probably have views nearer to kippers
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    Just listened to Ed Davey trashing Osborne on the radio and siding with May. Particularly interesting since Davey is one of those Liberals who was supposed to be quite close to Tories like Osborne and alarmed by Theresa May's authoritarianism.

    The more I see of PM May the less impressed I am. But so longas the only likely alternative is Osbrowne or one of his Notting Hill clones, she'll have my backing.
  • MaxPB said:

    weejonnie said:

    A few more polls released of 538 - all of which say that its a tie (Hillary's overall lead down to 2% (lowest was 1.7). Donald's chance still South of 40% but getting closer)

    Isn't this the point at which Americans are supposed to start waking up and paying attention to politics, post-Labor Day? "Oh look" says America, "the Democrats have picked an old lady who has to be thrown into a van..."
    Two words: Demographics, ground game.

    But, if she faints or stumbles during the Debate then it's over and we need those nuclear shelters in our gardens.
    Sometimes the rising tide is so strong that a good ground game and demographics get swept away. This is what happened in June when millions of "never voted" turned out to vote leave.
    Maybe those millions turned out in part because Leave had a better ground game, and those of us who participated in it were too busy leafletting and canvassing to.come on here and tell you how fantastic everything was and how we were clearly going to win.

    Naming no names...
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    rcs1000 said:

    nunu said:

    How long before they raise it to 0.6% I wonder?
    Well, we're 10 weeks into the 12 weeks of Q3, so much of the data is already in. My guess is that we'll end up at 0.4 or 0.5%, simply because consumption has been so strong.

    That being said; the UK economy's reliance on consumption is its achilles heel. We spend too much and save too little. UK plc has gone from being a net creditor (i.e. the world owes us money) to being a net debtor over the last 30 years. With a current account deficit of 7% in the first half of this year, that will continue to worsen. It's a trend that cannot continue indefinitely, and - once Brexit is out the way - needs to be a key focus for Hammond and May.
    Well the only way out of that is either by devaluation or tarrifs, so that Britain consumes fewer imports, and instead consumes more local products.

    A forced gradual devaluation, like the Chinese do, by inflating the foreign currency reserves until the pound is at parity with the euro.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Some wag quipped that Hillary's doctor should get a job with the DWP after declaring her fit to serve as president.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    weejonnie said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Essexit said:


    Anyone else getting deja vu?

    I am looking at what is going on in the USA.
    It's gripping, huge fun and outrageous - what a vintage year
    Will come down to GOTV (as usual). Of course many Republicans think the Democrats just have to push a few buttons on Soros's machines to get their vote out.

    However this may give a hint - higher voting levels will probably favour The Don.
    Why is everyone assuming higher turnout will favour Donald? Donald could just as well drive turnout of minorities against him. We just don't know that's why this election is particularly hard to call. We are all letting our hearts block our judgements on this one.
    This is the only link between the US 2016 Presidential election and Brexit:

    http://www.msnbc.com/mtp-daily

    If you remember Remain usually did well in areas where incomes rose during the Cameron years and Leave usually won in areas where incomes dropped.

    The same divide appears in America, that's why I say Michigan is easier for Trump than Pennsylvania.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited September 2016
    O/T:

    Most of the country is experiencing 20+ degrees today for the last time for about six months. Some places will be about 10 degrees colder tomorrow compared to today.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia

    A bit harsh, if HRC’s own doctor can’t keep up with the latest spin line, why should Bill...?
    You'd have thought Bimbo Dicking Bill would know what is up with her, being her husband and all

    "In sickness and in health" and all that..
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Pulpstar said:

    Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia

    A bit harsh, if HRC’s own doctor can’t keep up with the latest spin line, why should Bill...?
    You'd have thought Bimbo Dicking Bill would know what is up with her, being her husband and all

    "In sickness and in health" and all that..
    Still got this nagging doubt that it ain't pneumonia.
  • Some wag quipped that Hillary's doctor should get a job with the DWP after declaring her fit to serve as president.

    Ha !
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/09/15/facebook-to-gather-questions-for-moderators-of-presidential-debate/

    Why not just get the Democrat party to submit the questions directly and cut out the middleman?
  • AndyJS said:

    O/T:

    Most of the country is experiencing 20+ degrees today for the last time for about six months. Some places will be about 10 degrees colder tomorrow compared to today.

    This makes me sad.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia

    A bit harsh, if HRC’s own doctor can’t keep up with the latest spin line, why should Bill...?
    You'd have thought Bimbo Dicking Bill would know what is up with her, being her husband and all

    "In sickness and in health" and all that..
    Still got this nagging doubt that it ain't pneumonia.
    I doubt they would say pneumonia if it wasn't.

    It may be something else as well, or possibly not. It isn't unusual for pneumonia to either accompany something else or follow something else.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    O/T:

    Most of the country is experiencing 20+ degrees today for the last time for about six months. Some places will be about 10 degrees colder tomorrow compared to today.

    This makes me sad.
    It's not supposed to be this hot in September.
  • rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
  • weejonnie said:

    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/09/15/facebook-to-gather-questions-for-moderators-of-presidential-debate/

    Why not just get the Democrat party to submit the questions directly and cut out the middleman?

    Im sure a few of us could come up with some.

    eg - is it true you wanted to pay nigel farage to vote for you
  • AndyJS said:

    O/T:

    Most of the country is experiencing 20+ degrees today for the last time for about six months. Some places will be about 10 degrees colder tomorrow compared to today.

    This makes me sad.
    That makes me relieved - our living room was 27 c last night
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited September 2016
    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Wooophs, bonking Bill misspoke again...

    Bill Clinton has said he misspoke when he said his wife had, like many others, just had a bout of flu, when he meant to say pneumonia

    A bit harsh, if HRC’s own doctor can’t keep up with the latest spin line, why should Bill...?
    You'd have thought Bimbo Dicking Bill would know what is up with her, being her husband and all

    "In sickness and in health" and all that..
    Still got this nagging doubt that it ain't pneumonia.
    I have a doubt that it isn't, I'm 10% sure it's pneumonia.

    Speaking of which, 2 new state polls:

    Ohio, Suffolk

    Trump 42
    Hillary 39
    Johnson 4
    Stein 1

    Virginia, UMW

    Hillary 46
    Trump 41

    Hillary 40
    Trump 37
    Johnson 8
    McMullin 3
    Stein 1

    Who knows what's going on in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, N.H. and Colorado.
  • rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    Is the parliament we have 8% of the seats in?
  • Rumours of a Monmouth poll with Trump 8% ahead in Iowa...
  • Rumours of a Monmouth poll with Trump 8% ahead in Iowa...

    He is clearly popular with the English Democrats then
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited September 2016

    Rumours of a Monmouth poll with Trump 8% ahead in Iowa...

    We already know Trump is probably ahead in Iowa for 2 weeks now, we need polls from Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Colorado, N.H, N.Mexico.

    Because if Trump wins any one of those he's President.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
  • rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    Yes it's sort of elected but not by us. The American President is elected but I wouldn't want a President Bush writing our laws unilaterally over-riding the Parliament we elect.
  • MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    I would agree that T May was not elected by anyone (except a few Tory MPs).

    I would also suggest that her rise the the position of PM is a feature of our democratic system. As we do not have a Deputy PM and acknowledge that in the event of the PM departing for whatever reason, it is the prerogative of the party to select a new leader who will become PM, subject to having the confidence of the House.

    Off the top of my head it works like this for 50% of our last 8 PMs:

    May Became PM in mid term
    Cameron Became PM as a result of election
    Brown Became PM in mid term
    Blair Became PM as a result of election
    Major Became PM in mid term
    Thatcher Became PM as a result of election
    Callaghan Became PM in mid term
    Wilson Became PM as a result of election

    It is neither rare or unusual, I think as an electorate we know the procedure by now!
  • On topic: No surprise the headline figures are choppy in such a febrile media environment with a lot of novelty in the mix. But the underlying picture is clear. There are several Parsecs in the public consciousness between May and Corbyn as potential PM's. If/when May calls her Brexit election next Spring Britain's Left will experience an ELE. May seems to realise western democracy is heading towards a choice between a German style perpetual Grand Coalition or the traditional Centre Right party offering to fuse with it's new nationalist and protectionist right wing competitor. May has picked the later and given the Tories historic genius for reinvention coupled with FPTP it will likely work.
  • MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    The 38.6 million people who voted for the EPP which beat the 40.2 million who voted for the S&D. Isn't European PR voting great?

    None of those voters were British.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    The 38.6 million people who voted for the EPP which beat the 40.2 million who voted for the S&D. Isn't European PR voting great?

    None of those voters were British.
    To be pedantic he was elected by the MEPs.
  • MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Luxembourg has a good system where you can vote for individual candidates or the party list.
  • MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    A quick Google will tell you that. But you appear uninterested in the answer as it doesn't fit your narrative.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Not as an MEP at least.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    The 38.6 million people who voted for the EPP which beat the 40.2 million who voted for the S&D. Isn't European PR voting great?

    None of those voters were British.
    Point of order: the EPP stood in the London region, so an infinitesimally small percentage of them were British. (And, of course, they'll be Brits who are resident in other countries and who voted EPP too.)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited September 2016
    nunu said:
    " "When she got up to introduce me she was so nervous, she was shaking, and I said 'Wow, this is sort of strange,' and then she came up," Trump said. "So she had that in mind, there's no question about it." "

    This is an attack?
    He just said that she was nervous.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    nunu said:
    You want to be cautious about NBC reports on the campaign. Their doctoring of the 9/11 video (only showing the first stumble off the kerb but presenting it as if that were the whole incident) is the most breathtaking bit of dishonesty I have ever seen in a serious news report.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited September 2016

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    A quick Google will tell you that. But you appear uninterested in the answer as it doesn't fit your narrative.
    The Commission is unelected, Juncker is unelected and so is Oettinger. They have an executive which is a presidential style one, and yet they want to graft it onto a representative democracy at the same time. That way the president appoints rest of the executive but no one votes for them or the president. Your desperate EUphile rambling doesn't wash anymore. Respectfully, bugger off the Brussels where people still believe this rubbish. Your type is going extinct here.
  • Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz
  • Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Luxembourg has a good system where you can vote for individual candidates or the party list.
    And Juncker led his party to defeat for the first time since the 1970's.
    It was a historic political feat for Luxembourg.
  • rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    This is a favoured argument of Europhiles, but in reality is a cloak to pretend the EU commissioners are subject to democracy (or at least provide a defence to those who argue about it)

    Turnout in EU parliament elections is derisory and voters vote (if they do at all) on national not pan European lines.

    If the EPP are ahead, Juncker is Commission President and Schulz EU parliament president. If the Socialists were ahead it'd be the other way round. It's almost inconceivable it'd be neither of those. And who in the UK voted for any of our commissioners, who more often than not have just lost elections?

    It's a sham.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    This is a favoured argument of Europhiles, but in reality is a cloak to pretend the EU commissioners are subject to democracy (or at least provide a defence to those who argue about it)

    Turnout in EU parliament elections is derisory and voters vote (if they do at all) on national not pan European lines.

    If the EPP are ahead, Juncker is Commission President and Schulz EU parliament president. If the Socialists were ahead it'd be the other way round. It's almost inconceivable it'd be neither of those. And who in the UK voted for any of our commissioners, who more often than not have just lost elections?

    It's a sham.
    Why does the loser get a prize? And anyway, why isn't their presiding officer neutral?
  • Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.

    The fact that David Cameron had to resign over the Brexit result and Juncker did not tells you everything you need to know about the EU and democracy.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    edited September 2016

    Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    If Clinton wasn't a Democrat she'd be hung, drawn and quartered for her actions. i.e. the press and television channels are hopelessly biased in favour of the Democrats in general - and Clinton in Particular - just like the FBI (which is born out in that a recent poll shows less than a third of Americans now trust the media).
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.
  • RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    The 38.6 million people who voted for the EPP which beat the 40.2 million who voted for the S&D. Isn't European PR voting great?

    None of those voters were British.
    To be pedantic he was elected by the MEPs.
    But he went into the election as the EPP's nominated candidate and as their 38.6mn votes got 221 seats.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Speedy said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Luxembourg has a good system where you can vote for individual candidates or the party list.
    And Juncker led his party to defeat for the first time since the 1970's.
    It was a historic political feat for Luxembourg.
    That's not true. Juncker's CSV was the largest party with 23 of the 60 seats at the Luxembourg election in 2013. (And 23 seats is more that it achieved in 1999 or 1994, and I can't be bothered to look further back.)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    The 38.6 million people who voted for the EPP which beat the 40.2 million who voted for the S&D. Isn't European PR voting great?

    None of those voters were British.
    To be pedantic he was elected by the MEPs.
    But he went into the election as the EPP's nominated candidate and as their 38.6mn votes got 221 seats.
    Still wasn't elected by that vote, the same way our PMs aren't.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    Having to write such a long argument as to why the Commission is 'democratic' significantly reduces the strength of said argument.

    Obviously EU Commissioners aren't literally dictators, but they get away with looking and acting like them because of all the layers between them and actual voters.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.

    The fact that David Cameron had to resign over the Brexit result and Juncker did not tells you everything you need to know about the EU and democracy.
    Surely it tells you that Juncker has backbone and doesn't run away at the slightest whiff of failure :)
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
  • Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    Gas chambers are still used to carry out the death penalty in the us.

    So probably no (intentional) Godwin
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    Gas chambers are still used to carry out the death penalty in the us.

    So probably no (intentional) Godwin
    Fact of the day: no one has been gassed to death in the US since 1999, and the six states that have it only use it in the event that lethal injection cannot be administered. (Or the condemned chooses it.)
  • weejonnie said:

    Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    If Clinton wasn't a Democrat she'd be hung, drawn and quartered for her actions. i.e. the press and television channels are hopelessly biased in favour of the Democrats (which is born out in that a recent poll shows less than a third of Americans now trust the media).
    Hmm, florid.

    I wonder what metaphors the wee lad has in reserve for something REALLY bad.
  • Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    " The knives would be out ". Your sinister Donaldsonian fantasy is unsurprising.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.
  • ThrakThrak Posts: 494
    edited September 2016
    "Interesting to imagine whether Trump, Le Pen, and Putin would actually lead to a shift/realignment in international relations, or whether much would really change at all long term."

    If these people get into power the only winner is China. There are opportunities from a Trump-like disaster that the UK could benefit from but it has to be just the US isolating itself, not a wider collapse which might suck us into it.

    One thing that the people here with their UK perspective miss, that there is not the same feeling as regards being shy about supporting people like Trump, in fact there as many areas where it is unspoken to be supporting Clinton. They even out, maybe giving Trump Ohio but Clinton North Carolina, as an example.

    Another polling point; even now, with soft media coverage and his opponent unwell Trump cannot get an overall lead, something that Romney and McCain managed. Every time it gets closer there is a reaction to that possibility.

    Finally, Trump and his like rely on painting their countries as in decline and failing; well, if the US is the rest of the world is stuffed. Does the US actually want to be seen as a failing state? Really? When it comes down to it, looking at the power that they have will defeat moaning about the supposed power that they don't have.

  • Alistair said:

    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.

    Wow.
  • Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.

    The fact that David Cameron had to resign over the Brexit result and Juncker did not tells you everything you need to know about the EU and democracy.
    Whilst I differ from you somewhat about the EU, I cannot agree more that Juncker should have resigned.

    It was the EU's failure as much as it was Cameron's, and they appear not to be learning the lessons of that failure.

    If they're not careful they'll continue steaming straight onto the rocks.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,094
    edited September 2016

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Luxembourg has a good system where you can vote for individual candidates or the party list.
    An interesting if predictable anti-PR assumption from Mr Bedford's. There are plenty of PR systems where voters get choice of candidates as well, and some where there are effectively no safe seats at all. Whereas there is in practice no difference between being high on a (non-voter-selective, which of course they do not have) party list in Luxembourg or being the Labour candidate for Hackney or the Tory candidate for Sevenoaks (or Maidenhead) as far as the realistic prospect of voting someone out are concerned.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited September 2016
    ''(which is born out in that a recent poll shows less than a third of Americans now trust the media). ''

    The way Brexit and the US election are affecting the media is an interesting topic for another day.

    Today at Waterloo station I saw people trying to drum up interest in the economist
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Alistair said:

    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.

    I didn't realise Trump had a speech, I thought he just ad libbed it.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    edited September 2016
    rcs1000 said:

    Alistair said:

    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.

    I didn't realise Trump had a speech, I thought he just ad libbed it.
    He did - but he now knows enough that he has to keep on task - in case he opens his mouth to change feet.

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

    The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer - a satire on politics (and opinion pollers) starting Peter Cook
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    taffys said:

    ''(which is born out in that a recent poll shows less than a third of Americans now trust the media). ''

    The way Brexit and the US election are affecting the media is an interesting topic for another day.

    Today at Waterloo station I saw people trying to drum up interest in the economist

    That's unusual, maybe they've lost a lot of readers recently.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    rcs1000 said:

    Alistair said:

    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.

    I didn't realise Trump had a speech, I thought he just ad libbed it.
    His new handlers have convinced him to use a teleprompter. Unlike the last set of handlers he's sticking with it this time.
  • weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    Re: your last line. See discussions about banning/taxing weblinks here over the last 24h
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    She won't have pneumonia then of course, so if she falls over it will be something else.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    rcs1000 said:

    Speedy said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Facebook friend has just begun to realise the the changes afoot because of the EU link tax, the response was, "isn't there anything we can do about Oettinger? Can't we vote him out?" unsurprisingly, he is one of those people who was massively in favour of Remain. People say that leavers didn't know what they were voting for, I'd say the same is true for a lot of remainers. Needless the say I informed him that Oettinger as a member of the commission couldn't be voted out because he was never voted in, the EU being an undemocratic organisation, after all. My gloating didn't go down well.

    Isn't it a ban rather than a tax?
    Commissioners have confirmation hearings from the democratically elected Parliament. Governments can and do withdraw nominations if the Parliament doesn't like them. The Commission as a whole has to be confirmed or rejected by the Parliament and can be dismissed by it.And from this term onwards the Commission Presidency it's self s linked to winning the largest block in the Parliament. And of course commissioners are all nominated by elected national governments. But apart from all the multiple layers of democracy in the process it's entirely undemocratic. You'll be telling me no one elected Theresa May as PM next.
    The people of Maidenhead elected Theresa May. Who elected Juncker?
    At some point the people of luxemburg did. However as it was probably pr with a party list it would have been virtually impossible not to elect him if he was top of the list
    Luxembourg has a good system where you can vote for individual candidates or the party list.
    And Juncker led his party to defeat for the first time since the 1970's.
    It was a historic political feat for Luxembourg.
    That's not true. Juncker's CSV was the largest party with 23 of the 60 seats at the Luxembourg election in 2013. (And 23 seats is more that it achieved in 1999 or 1994, and I can't be bothered to look further back.)
    True, but his party lost power for the first time since 1979.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024

    Can any of the fluent speakers of Trumplish on here explain (tastlessness apart) what Baby Don is actually trying to say here?

    'Trump Jr.: 'They'd be warming up the gas chamber' if Trump acted like Clinton'

    http://tinyurl.com/jtwk5gz

    Absolutely disgusting from Trump Jr.

    Cue the cries of biased liberal media twisting his words, lol it seems you have to be a scholar to really understand what the Trumpeters mean.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    8 point gap in Iowa poll.

    #TRUMPTRAIN
  • Alistair said:

    Trump's teleprompter broke, he's reading thr speech verbatim from the paper, head down.

    'Beautiful', 'great', 'huge', 'tremendous'.

    Rinse and repeat.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    edited September 2016
    Ishmael_X said:

    nunu said:
    You want to be cautious about NBC reports on the campaign. Their doctoring of the 9/11 video (only showing the first stumble off the kerb but presenting it as if that were the whole incident) is the most breathtaking bit of dishonesty I have ever seen in a serious news report.
    That's right when you don't like what happened blame the MSM right out of the delusional Farage and Corbyn play book.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited September 2016
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Alistair said:
    Hah "Yuuge!"
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    At the Commander in Chief forum Hilary spent most of the time standing and Trump spent the majority of it sitting down.

    Questions are being asked.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    nunu said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    nunu said:
    You want to be cautious about NBC reports on the campaign. Their doctoring of the 9/11 video (only showing the first stumble off the kerb but presenting it as if that were the whole incident) is the most breathtaking bit of dishonesty I have ever seen in a serious news report.
    That's right when you don't like what happened blame the MSM right out of the delusional Farage and Corbyn play book.
    http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines-2016/video-msnbc-gets-incredibly-defensive-about-hillary-collapsing-at-9-11-event

    for NBC doing this

    http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/hillary-clinton-when-stumbling-tripping-passing-out-collapsing-at-911-ceremony-cnn-edited-footage-anderson-cooper-youtube/

    for CNN

    I expect you will now wish to withdraw and apologise for your stupid and bad-mannered post.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Alistair said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    At the Commander in Chief forum Hilary spent most of the time standing and Trump spent the majority of it sitting down.

    Questions are being asked.
    Was Clinton propped up?
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Alistair said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    At the Commander in Chief forum Hilary spent most of the time standing and Trump spent the majority of it sitting down.

    Questions are being asked.
    Question are indeed being asked, what is he hiding.....
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    edited September 2016
    nunu said:

    Alistair said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    At the Commander in Chief forum Hilary spent most of the time standing and Trump spent the majority of it sitting down.

    Questions are being asked.
    Question are indeed being asked, what is he hiding.....
    The MSM right wing media is hiding the truth about Trump's health

    https://news.fastcompany.com/donald-trump-is-clinically-obese-based-on-his-bmi-4019195

    He is about to have a heart attack any minute now.......
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Speedy said:

    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.

    Bill Bryson's backyard.
  • I wonder if we are underestimating the power of broadcast media technology in political trends.

    From the invention of the radio in the early 20s onwards until the turn of the millenium, broadcasting technology was a pyramid where a small number of people controlling a small number of stations held incredible power to propagandise their views, conciously or unconciously to the masses.

    While Goebells was the first to do this ruthlessly and other states (eg USSR) controlled the media tightly, in the west there was far less government control, and inevitably this meant the views of the people who ran and worked in the media propagandised to the nation both intentionally and unconciously. People who ran and worked in the media were in general middle class, civilised types (london types in the UK) and showbusiness actors etc who even by the standard of the time lived very modern lives (bloomsbury set).

    Is it therefore surprising that in social matters in particular their values went from being held by a small number of people in the 20s to the mainstream by the turn of the millenium.

    The internet has now destroyed that pyramid, anything broadcast by the MSM can be fact checked in minutes. With that trust in them has corroded. Is this also therefore a reason why trust in their values is corroding and anti-liberals (in the small l sense of the word) such as Trump, Farage and Le Pen are prospering and now starting to even win elections?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    Go Jezza!!!!!!!!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Speedy said:

    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.

    Huuuuugee.... :p
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    weejonnie said:

    Speedy said:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/776455516658798592

    Now I'm a bit of a contrarian, and although Trump is currently about 1 state away from the W.House, I think the betting should start focusing on the debates which start in 10 days.

    We are at the point where the debate winner might be the election winner.

    In which case surely the correct odds are 50-50.

    Of course it is not who wins the debates - it is who the media portrays as winning the debates - and that is unlikely to be Mr Trump.

    However with trust in the media at an all-time low, I suspect they may be panicking as their influence evaporates.
    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/

    126 million voted in 2012: http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

    So enough people actually watch the debates to prevent the media from dictating who the winner was.

    The debates this time are going to be the most compulsively watchable political TV ever. I think I fancy Trump given Hillary's handicap of having to stand up for 90 minutes without falling over with pneumonia.
    At the Commander in Chief forum Hilary spent most of the time standing and Trump spent the majority of it sitting down.

    Questions are being asked.
    Was Clinton propped up?
    Yes, basically. The format is Lauer and candidate each sitting on a bar stool. Trump sits on his, Clinton keeps sliding off hers and leaning against it as if it is too high and/or irritates her piles.
  • Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.

    The fact that David Cameron had to resign over the Brexit result and Juncker did not tells you everything you need to know about the EU and democracy.
    Whilst I differ from you somewhat about the EU, I cannot agree more that Juncker should have resigned.

    It was the EU's failure as much as it was Cameron's, and they appear not to be learning the lessons of that failure.

    If they're not careful they'll continue steaming straight onto the rocks.

    Of course Theresa May has a democratic candidate. She has multiple democratic candidates. More to the point there are multiple democratic ways of removing her from office. Despite noone outside her constituency having voted for her and then not as an MP. I know sarcasm doesn't travel on the internet but I'm clearly pointing out the significant overlap between the Westminster model and how the Commission is appointed.

    The fact that David Cameron had to resign over the Brexit result and Juncker did not tells you everything you need to know about the EU and democracy.
    Whilst I differ from you somewhat about the EU, I cannot agree more that Juncker should have resigned.

    It was the EU's failure as much as it was Cameron's, and they appear not to be learning the lessons of that failure.

    If they're not careful they'll continue steaming straight onto the rocks.
    I think that's likely.

    People like Juncker have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. The only motivation he has is to punish those who've embarassed him.
  • Speedy said:

    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.

    Deplorable.
  • Speedy said:

    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.

    Deplorable.
    Democracy.

    Deplorable only if someone cheats.

  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    The strange logic of the Boundary Commission !!
    Having perused the report on the South East , I was bemused for the reason given for transferring Nelson ward instead of the obvious Baffins ward from Portsmouth North to South ." We propose to include Nelson ward in Portsmouth South so that more of the Harbour is in one constituency "
    As Portsmouth Harbour is just water and contains no actual voters this seems plain bizarre .
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Speedy said:

    The rumours about Iowa were real:
    http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

    Iowa, Monmouth.

    Trump 45
    Hillary 37
    Johnson 8
    Stein 2

    So Trump only needs to lead in one extra state for him to push above 270.

    Deplorable.
    Democracy.

    Deplorable only if someone cheats.

    And even then entirely condonable if the cheating is in one's preferred direction.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    One thing Trump and Brexit supporters probably have in common: if you ask them whether life has got better or worse since the year 2000, most of them would say worse. Not necessarily in economic terms, but in lots of other ways.
This discussion has been closed.