politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump 4% ahead in Ohio. Must be time for the Guardian to re

Farron 2020

Only Bronze medal

Not one of the Guardian's better ideas and that is saying something. But with Clinton increasingly ahead in Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and now even North Carolina Ohio is not looking as critical this time out as it has been in the past.

ThreeQuidder said:

That second one is quite amusing now that we've reclaimed our sovereignty!

Though obviously we need to redirect the money saved on the EU budget to dental care.

MikeK .... did you receive my email as regards claiming your £100 Wm. Hill competition prize?

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

DavidL said:

Not one of the Guardian's better ideas and that is saying something. But with Clinton increasingly ahead in Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and now even North Carolina Ohio is not looking as critical this time out as it has been in the past.

Guardian readers this time need to contact residents en masse in Florida. Just tell them to vote Trump.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Personally I would go for both Heathrow and Gatwick otherwise we will have to start the debate about the shortage of runways in the south of England all over again before the first sod of earth at Heathrow is even turned over. I like the idea of a fast rail link between the airports too.

The Guardian is quite sniffy about being regarded as a UK paper in the US so won't enjoy being reminded of this.

Does anyone have the declaration times for the various states this time round ?

I thought it was Clark County, not Cook County?

But yeah, the Guardian campaign was a thing of hilarious beauty.

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Two new runways at LHR, one new runway at LGW, with an airside Hyperloop running between them.

You're just baiting me, aren't you?

Okay, I've bitten.

Hyperloop: LOL!

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Like he actually watches it!

peter_from_putney said:

IanB2 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Do Heathrow but shift the runways west over the M25, so that planes are higher in the air over west London hence quieter.

As a SW London resident and someone who is often directly below the Heathrow flight path, I have to say that the noise nuisance has decreased very considerably over even the past five years and immeasurably since the dreadful Concorde days. Sadly however, the air pollution problems are as bad as ever.

Also a west London resident and don't understand what the fuss is about. Air pollution is a problem, but that's much an issue about traffic (and in particular motor manufacturers causally doctoring test results).

Whilst an amusing notion, there's actually zero chance that the Guardian swung the 2004 election for Bush. It's basically an urban myth.

Clark County only had 70k votes cast, against a 140k statewide margin for Bush. The swing there was very close to that across the rest of Ohio, and Kerry's result was slightly better in Ohio than in the rest of the country.

It certainly didn't work as a project... but nor did it change anything.

surbiton said:

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Two new runways at LHR, one new runway at LGW, with an airside Hyperloop running between them.

WE also need flying buses between the two airports like you see in Total Recall

I don't remember any flying buses.

On topic, it must have been like a love bombing by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Pulpstar said:

surbiton said:

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Two new runways at LHR, one new runway at LGW, with an airside Hyperloop running between them.

WE also need flying buses between the two airports like you see in Total Recall

I don't remember any flying buses.

May be he means Johnny Taxi?

MaxPB said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

Just about the only upside of my other half's accident is that he now flakes out around 9 and apparently hasn't picked up that this is back on tv.

How is his recovery going?

He's doing well. It will be a long slow process. He's 98% of the way there mentally and it's now mostly about gaining physical strength and confidence.

AlastairMeeks said:

MaxPB said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

Just about the only upside of my other half's accident is that he now flakes out around 9 and apparently hasn't picked up that this is back on tv.

How is his recovery going?

He's doing well. It will be a long slow process. He's 98% of the way there mentally and it's now mostly about gaining physical strength and confidence.

That's good to hear. Hope he is able to fully recover as soon as possible.

AlastairMeeks said:

MaxPB said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

Just about the only upside of my other half's accident is that he now flakes out around 9 and apparently hasn't picked up that this is back on tv.

How is his recovery going?

He's doing well. It will be a long slow process. He's 98% of the way there mentally and it's now mostly about gaining physical strength and confidence.

Great news.

foxinsoxuk said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Two new runways at LHR, one new runway at LGW, with an airside Hyperloop running between them.

You're just baiting me, aren't you?

Okay, I've bitten.

Hyperloop: LOL!

Teleportation is the future. No ned for runways at all...

Yes, but by then we'll have to deal with teleportation credits handed out by the federation.

COLORADO voter registration surge alert

In 2012 at close of registration there were 80000 more Reps than Dems.
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VoterRegNumbers/2012VoterRegNumbers.html
This year with a couple of weeks to go there are now more Dems than Reps and that was not the case a month ago.
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VoterRegNumbers/VoterRegNumbers.html

peter_from_putney said:

IanB2 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Do Heathrow but shift the runways west over the M25, so that planes are higher in the air over west London hence quieter.

As a SW London resident and someone who is often directly below the Heathrow flight path, I have to say that the noise nuisance has decreased very considerably over even the past five years and immeasurably since the dreadful Concorde days. Sadly however, the air pollution problems are as bad as ever.

And the new runway(s) will be north of the existing airport, meaning fewer aircraft over leafy south west London. The NIMBYs there should be encouraging it!

Oh, and I think you meant the awesome Concorde days - I grew up 20 miles west of Heathrow, as a boy I would eagerly run outside at 18:05 to watch the magnificent bird on her way to New York, where this marvellous pice of British engineering would arrive earlier than she had taken off.

Anyway if Global Britain is the theme of the Tory Conference then they really need to get on with it. We either intend to be open for business or we don't.

Quite an interesting piece on Bloomberg about this: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-04/u-k-brexit-ministers-see-global-britain-as-tactic-not-slogan

peter_from_putney said:

IanB2 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Do Heathrow but shift the runways west over the M25, so that planes are higher in the air over west London hence quieter.

As a SW London resident and someone who is often directly below the Heathrow flight path, I have to say that the noise nuisance has decreased very considerably over even the past five years and immeasurably since the dreadful Concorde days. Sadly however, the air pollution problems are as bad as ever.

As a West London resident, the air pollution comes from dodgy diesel cars and vans. We need to force them off the roads.

AlastairMeeks said:

MaxPB said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

Just about the only upside of my other half's accident is that he now flakes out around 9 and apparently hasn't picked up that this is back on tv.

How is his recovery going?

He's doing well. It will be a long slow process. He's 98% of the way there mentally and it's now mostly about gaining physical strength and confidence.

That's great news. Hope his recovery continues.

DavidL said:

Rogueywon said:

DavidL said:

Personally I would go for both Heathrow and Gatwick otherwise we will have to start the debate about the shortage of runways in the south of England all over again before the first sod of earth at Heathrow is even turned over. I like the idea of a fast rail link between the airports too.

Unless you want public money involved, this would basically equate to "expand Heathrow". It's been fairly conclusively shown that Gatwick could only finance their expansion if Heathrow wasn't allowed to expand (and Gatwick's owners aren't denying this).

The dedicated rail link is a red herring of an idea. At most, it would be carrying a few thousand passengers per day. That's just not enough to justify any kind of dedicated rail link with a sensible service frequency, so basically you'd be spending a fortune to pull around empty carriages.

The rail link allows Gatwick to share in any hub premium that Heathrow may have by allowing relatively easy transfers. I think it would make the expansion of Gatwick much more attractive by increasing the custom available from those arriving at or departing from Heathrow.

If the forecasts that both airports about future demand have any validity there really should be plenty of trade for both, particularly if they are better linked. There may even be an argument all too soon for expanding other airports around London such as Stansted in addition.

I believe experience elsewhere shows that transport of virtually any kind, sometimes including inter-terminal transfer busses, negate hub benefits. Source: I think one of the commission reports.

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

Anyway if Global Britain is the theme of the Tory Conference then they really need to get on with it. We either intend to be open for business or we don't.

Quite an interesting piece on Bloomberg about this: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-04/u-k-brexit-ministers-see-global-britain-as-tactic-not-slogan

Certainly worth a read.

PB Brexiters are very fond of telling us what the EU will and won't do based on its objective economic self-interest, over-looking the fact that the UK is being driven almost entirely by the politics. Why they think the EU might be any different is far from clear.

I expect us to settle into tariff free trade (if not customs union trade) with the EU eventually because of that self interest on both sides but it is going to be a bumpy ride and there is nothing inevitable about it. It seems less likely that this will have the bells and whistles of the Single Passport etc that comes with full membership but the implications of that for London are less than clear.

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

You watch it sober?

DavidL said:

The rail link allows Gatwick to share in any hub premium that Heathrow may have by allowing relatively easy transfers. I think it would make the expansion of Gatwick much more attractive by increasing the custom available from those arriving at or departing from Heathrow.

If the forecasts that both airports about future demand have any validity there really should be plenty of trade for both, particularly if they are better linked. There may even be an argument all too soon for expanding other airports around London such as Stansted in addition.

It really doesn't work. Even at Heathrow, transfer traffic only accounts for a minority of passengers (just under a third). Most transfer passengers are transferring within the same airline alliance and hence generally within the same terminal. Passengers do try to avoid multi-terminal transfers. Gatwick has only a tiny portion of transfer traffic.

So a rail link would only be serving a small market. Rail lines have a huge passenger capacity, but also very high infrastructure and operating costs. So if you're going for a "new infrastructure" link not only would there be billions in construction costs, but also a huge ongoing subsidy requirement, which either airline passengers or taxpayers would end up footing the bill for. If you want to do it over existing infrastructure, you'd need to fit in with much busier commuter services and would end up with a very long journey time.

Plus airlines and passengers would likely avoid the thing like the plague anyway. Passengers have choices and like simple transfers.

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

Anyway if Global Britain is the theme of the Tory Conference then they really need to get on with it. We either intend to be open for business or we don't.

Quite an interesting piece on Bloomberg about this: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-04/u-k-brexit-ministers-see-global-britain-as-tactic-not-slogan

Certainly worth a read.

PB Brexiters are very fond of telling us what the EU will and won't do based on its objective economic self-interest, over-looking the fact that the UK is being driven almost entirely by the politics. Why they think the EU might be any different is far from clear.

It's slightly amiss on EU rules about us talking to third parties on trade - we can't make a trade agreement, because we're in the customs union, but the EU cannot take any action on the basis that we are talking to potential partners.

I think the big issue over the City, will be about how the EU 27 continue to find international finance for business, a lot of which comes via the City. If Frankfurt and Paris believe that they can take up the slack and expand into any space ceded by making passporting difficult, then the politics may take over.

The EU is currently looking to expand the AIFMD passport to non EU nations, so with the UK already being compliant with EU banking and Financial Services regulation, it would seem a strange move to include Singapore and not London.

https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-advises-extension-funds-passport-12-non-eu-countries

I think this if from July 16.

TonyE said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

Anyway if Global Britain is the theme of the Tory Conference then they really need to get on with it. We either intend to be open for business or we don't.

Quite an interesting piece on Bloomberg about this: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-04/u-k-brexit-ministers-see-global-britain-as-tactic-not-slogan

Certainly worth a read.

PB Brexiters are very fond of telling us what the EU will and won't do based on its objective economic self-interest, over-looking the fact that the UK is being driven almost entirely by the politics. Why they think the EU might be any different is far from clear.

It's slightly amiss on EU rules about us talking to third parties on trade - we can't make a trade agreement, because we're in the customs union, but the EU cannot take any action on the basis that we are talking to potential partners.

I think the big issue over the City, will be about how the EU 27 continue to find international finance for business, a lot of which comes via the City. If Frankfurt and Paris believe that they can take up the slack and expand into any space ceded by making passporting difficult, then the politics may take over.

The EU is currently looking to expand the AIFMD passport to non EU nations, so with the UK already being compliant with EU banking and Financial Services regulation, it would seem a strange move to include Singapore and not London.

https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-advises-extension-funds-passport-12-non-eu-countries

I think this if from July 16.

Personally I think that making it difficult for EU businesses to draw on London's skills, financial expertise and liquidity would be self harming for EU nations and their growth prospects but Ian is right to point out that politics means that sort of stupidity is far from impossible.

Good morning, everyone.

Works both ways. Unsurprised the American electorate told the Guardian its view was at the back of the queue.

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

foxinsoxuk said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Morning all. Are people here in favour of Gatwick, Heathrow, or Heathrow Hub, or any combination thereof? I'm liking the cut of Heathrow Hub's gib at the moment (probably meaning they won't get the gig).

Two new runways at LHR, one new runway at LGW, with an airside Hyperloop running between them.

You're just baiting me, aren't you?

Okay, I've bitten.

Hyperloop: LOL!

Teleportation is the future. No ned for runways at all...

That would be truly fantastic. No need for bridges over the Forth either, a great relief after yesterday.

And to think we went to all the trouble of leaving the UK to stop people coming here.

I accept that my teleportation plan does need work on how immigration controls would function.

You'd have to file a flight plan for international teleportation giving your schedule and destination. The bursts of energy as people materialise should be instantly detectable and a supercomputer in control of a fleet of drones would instantly vaporise any unauthorised arrivals.

DavidL said:

Not one of the Guardian's better ideas and that is saying something. But with Clinton increasingly ahead in Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and now even North Carolina Ohio is not looking as critical this time out as it has been in the past.

Absolutely. After the events of the last seven days, "Trump 4% ahead in Ohio" seems a downright peculiar headline to run. Particularly coming after the prominence given to a pro-Trump tweet yesterday.

Perhaps it stems from a desire to bolster a betting position? If so, I think the influence of this site is being overestimated, particularly when so many sources of objective information are available.

FF43 said:

DavidL said:

Anyway if Global Britain is the theme of the Tory Conference then they really need to get on with it. We either intend to be open for business or we don't.

Quite an interesting piece on Bloomberg about this: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-04/u-k-brexit-ministers-see-global-britain-as-tactic-not-slogan

From the article: "The politicians are adamant that their meetings with the international community in the wake of the referendum suggest no adverse post-Brexit impact on the attitudes of global investors or multinational companies."

Reports of those meetings go like this: Ministers ask business people what they want from Brexit. Answer, the Single Market. Answer ignored then Minister lectures business people on the great opportunities of Brexit. Business people are slightly irritated at having to repeat the performance at several ministries because officials are not talking to each other.

Having the single market via EEA (EFTA) is fine in the short term. But the problem with the EEA is that there is a lot of non trade based legislation tacked to it (check the Annexes), because Norway encouraged that so that the rather Europhile political class could eventually take them into the EU.

Their voters however, have other ideas, and would like to see a loosening of the ties further (from what I understand of it). But rather like the UK for generations, they simply have a political class which give them no alternative to vote for.

JackW said:

Although Quinnipiac polls have a Trump lean of +2 the Ohio polling this cycle is one of the few bright spots for Trump along with Iowa. That said the early voting numbers from Iowa are not encouraging for Trump. Both states do however have a significantly better GOP ground game than the other swing states so Iowa may yet flip to Donald.

As Missouri did in 08 it may be that Ohio will lose the bell weather status this year and edge to Trump whilst Clinton comfortably wins the electoral college. The other post debate state polling is solidly with Clinton with boosts in Florida, North Carolina, Nevada and Colorado.

The turnaround in Colorado polling is astonishing. Vindicates the Dems pulling out resources a while ago. The 'fake' undecided were all clearly Dems waiting for a reason to vote Dem.

£ sinking towards $1.275 and the FTSE taking off...

IanB2 said:

£ sinking towards $1.275 and the FTSE taking off...

31 year low

So glad we Took Back Control...

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In other news, Michael Gove has been formally blackballed from the metropolitan elite:

https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/783049181011279872

Dear oh dear. What am I missing in finding that program not only unfunny but unwatchable?

It is the most popular programme in Ireland by some margin

IanB2 said:

£ sinking towards $1.275 and the FTSE taking off...

My equities doing very well, though I do think that some retracing will occur as nothing has actually happened.

Brexit economics is quite good for us that own assets.

Mr. B2, surely it's a collared dove?

Scott_P said:

IanB2 said:

£ sinking towards $1.275 and the FTSE taking off...

31 year low

So glad we Took Back Control...

I confess to a degree of ignorance on this. If sterling is falling and I accept that's good news for exporters, doesn't that mean we'll be paying more for our oil as it's priced in dollars and therefore isn't this just a precursor to the return of inflation ?

Presumably the need to bolster sterling will therefore mean not only closing off QE as soon as possible but increasing interest rates as soon as possible as well.

I'd also assumed much of the current FTSE rise is based on companies who trade in dollars anyway and it bears little resemblance (apart from as some macabre virility symbol) to the actual state of the UK economy.

Pennsylvania - Franklin and Marshall

Clinton 47 .. Trump 38

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/10/03/clinton-gains-in-new-fm-pennsylvania-poll/

stodge said:

Scott_P said:

IanB2 said:

£ sinking towards $1.275 and the FTSE taking off...

31 year low

So glad we Took Back Control...

I confess to a degree of ignorance on this. If sterling is falling and I accept that's good news for exporters, doesn't that mean we'll be paying more for our oil as it's priced in dollars and therefore isn't this just a precursor to the return of inflation ?

Presumably the need to bolster sterling will therefore mean not only closing off QE as soon as possible but increasing interest rates as soon as possible as well.

I'd also assumed much of the current FTSE rise is based on companies who trade in dollars anyway and it bears little resemblance (apart from as some macabre virility symbol) to the actual state of the UK economy.

Correct on both points (ex the interest rate decision depends on inflation rather than the exchange rate per se).

On the first, there is clearly a lag as retailers have stocks already purchased, and any larger enterprise vulnerable to swings in currency will have hedged its exposure for six months or a year ahead. Hence for example why the price of wine has yet to rise following Brexit.