politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is Hillary Clinton really the certainty that she now appears –

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

But in a single move he's outed Labour, stop the war and others as a bunch of Putin/ISIS loving traitors. Very smart politics, even if a little bit blunt.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Its going to be epic here on Nov 9th if Trump does manage to win.

You keep saying that.
I see you can get c.28/5 to back Trump on Matchbook at the mo'. I assume you're poised to fill your boots when it reaches the magic 6?

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

+1

Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.

619 said:

https://twitter.com/samantharonson/status/786405231114330112

Now that allegation WILL provoke litigation....

DecrepitJohnL said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

619 said:

Chris said:

619 said:

Those are absolutely terrible polls for Trump

Comparing them with Nate Silver's state-by-state estimates and averaging the three, the Clinton leads are around 0.5% bigger in the new polls.

Clearly Trump can't win unless there is either:
(1) a systematic error in the polls or
(2) a swing of 3-4% back to him.

1) would be a massive crisis in polling if true
2) Its down to Clinton to screw up. Cant see Trump having the skill or personaility to do anything to improve his standing

1) May 2015, June 2016. And from what I can make out the US pollsters are not nearly as good as the British ones who still systematically underestimated Tory/Leave voters

The pollsters might have got it wrong -- but in which direction? The most obvious problem is they might be missing previous non-voters who will turn out for Trump.

But there was some analysis on 538 which showed it was not actually Trump drawing this crowd -- it was Bernie Sanders. So if the polls are under-sampling Bernie's erstwhile supporters, are they more likely to vote for Hillary (same party, Establishment) or Trump (wrong party and while he is a political outsider, he is famously a billionaire property developer)?

And on that depends whether a long odds bet on Trump in a couple of weeks is worth a punt. He is 4-1 at the moment in a two horse race. 6-1 or more in a couple of weeks and I may bite unless he has been discovered to have deflowered the presidents daughters or something.

JackW said:

Alistair said:

JackW said:

National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,868 - 12 Oct

Clinton 44.4 .. Trump 44.0

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

Just wait till that dude from Illinois gets polled again.

The black chappie from Illinois .... bloody Obama skewing the polls again !! ....

Apparently he also earns over $75k......

Theuniondivvie said:

Patrick said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Patrick said:

here's one for Malc and the Nats to mull over:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835447/Scotland-s-bigger-economic-basket-case-Greece.html

You posting a link from the Mail doesn't approach mullable I'm afraid.

Ahh.... but the Mail are only referring to a piece of independent research that points out how shite Scotland's deficit problem has become. Play the ball not the player. It is a serious financial problem for both Scotland and the UK. It is a serous political problem for the SNP. Part of their USP is appearing to be competent in the knowledge that Labour abandoned that aspiration years ago.

Why would I bother engaging with a player ineligible to get on the park, let alone kick the ball?

Fine, ignore the Scottish deficit then. I'm sure nothing painful will ever come of it anyway.

hamiltonace said:

It was interesting listening to TM at PM questions that she saw the Softbank purchase of ARM as a major investment by Japanese companies. The reality is that this was a debt leveraged smash and grab acquisition of the most valuable family of patents owned by the UK. I was a reluctant seller of my shares in ARM.

If our PM cannot understand the difference between selling the family silver and new investment then I feel we are lost.

ARM might have been a UK plc, in the FTSE 100, but that did not mean it was owned by Brits.

It's shareholder list will have been very international, and I suspect there are probably twice as many American shareholders than British ones. (ARM had a very actively traded ADR in the US; indeed, it may well have traded more shares there than in London.)

And Softbank may be a Japanese company, but it has an equally international shareholder list. Fidelity in London (rather than the parent in Boston) is a big holder, for example, as is Schroders.

Ultimately, the proportion of British ownership of ARM has probably decreased, but marginally. Perhaps from 25% to 15%. That is all.

Alistair said:

JackW said:

Jonathan Easley of "The Hill" assesses the polling nightmare that has engulfed Trump and now threatens down ballot GOP candidates :

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300715-women-independents-flee-trump-propelling-clinton-in-polls

Are you revising your Trump will win Utah stance?

No.

A single poll duth not make a deep red state go doolally.

Trump is certainly struggling but the split vote will help him and enough voters will hold their nose, very tightly, for Donald to cross the line.

There was value early on as a trading bet against Trump but that has gone.

GeoffM said:

AndyJS said:

Since we have a growing diabetes epidemic in the UK, an increase in the cost of food is no bad thing IMO.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07yklv8/panorama-diabetes-the-hidden-killer

You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious.
[/pedant]

"epidemic adjective uk ​ /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us ​ /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/
happening a lot and affecting many people:
Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions .
Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."

Theuniondivvie said:

GeoffM said:

AndyJS said:

Since we have a growing diabetes epidemic in the UK, an increase in the cost of food is no bad thing IMO.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07yklv8/panorama-diabetes-the-hidden-killer

You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious.
[/pedant]

"epidemic adjective uk ​ /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us ​ /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/
happening a lot and affecting many people:
Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions .
Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."

I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.

Nigelb said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

dugarbandier said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....

LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)

what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?

I'd list Cameron's successes as:

- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)

- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control

- SindyRef & AV

- Winning a second term.

Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....

Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.

You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....

Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...

The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.

How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?

May contemporary ?

May herself?

Now theres a conspiracy theory

Patrick said:

JosiasJessop said:

Patrick said:

This Marmite saga does point to a deeper risk for EU traders into the UK. If we get into tariffs and pricing disputes via a 'hard' Brexit we will see consumers just shift their preferences in many cases. It won't be a profit margin squeeze but a sales collapse for some.

In a fully globalised and debt laden world all countries are in a devaluation arms race. The UK has just managed by the back door to achieve a significant movement in its currency - back towards fair value. We're very lucky. AEP has a decent article on a similar theme in today's Telegraph.

I'm not sure consumers will change their preference to a large degree. The media will persecute one or two brands, whilst others who are more canny or lucky will emerge unscathed.

As an aside, what d you see as the 'fair value' for the pound?

The IMF see fair value to the USD as around $1.10:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/10/currency-guru-says-pound-slide-liberates-uk-from-malign-grip-of/

So we are today about right.

Lord King, the former Governor of the Bank of England, echoed the comments on sterling, saying the sell-off was largely welcome.

"During the referendum campaign, someone said the real danger of Brexit is you'll end up with higher interest rates, lower house prices and a lower exchange rate, and I thought: dream on.

Because that's what we've been trying to achieve for the past three years and now we have a chance of getting it."

IanB2 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

+1

Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.

I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.

What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

dugarbandier said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....

LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)

what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?

I'd list Cameron's successes as:

- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)

- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control

- SindyRef & AV

- Winning a second term.

Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....

Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.

You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....

Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...

The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.

How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?

I didn't say you were a researcher! In any case, I'm not going to bully your identity out of you - that's not nice. I more just interested in your inexplicable Damascene conversion to Mayite euroscepticism!!

I'm not a 'Mayite eurosceptic'.

I knew May personally at University, so possibly have a better measure of her than others.

I'm a Remainer who accepts we're leaving the EU.....or are those too many facts to process?

A fair explanation – thanks!

Dadge said:

IanB2 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

+1

Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.

I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.

What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.

But he has the job because he would be a bigger liability (aka risk to May) anywhere else. May will just arrange for him to be abroad a bit more.

Theuniondivvie said:

tlg86 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

GeoffM said:

AndyJS said:

Since we have a growing diabetes epidemic in the UK, an increase in the cost of food is no bad thing IMO.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07yklv8/panorama-diabetes-the-hidden-killer

You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious.
[/pedant]

"epidemic adjective uk ​ /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us ​ /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/
happening a lot and affecting many people:
Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions .
Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."

I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.

Pretty sure that just about every dictionary will have epidemic as a non-infectious-disease- specific adjective.

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=epidemic+definition

As a noun it has to be an infectious disease. It seems a bit of a fudge to allow it as an adjective to describe anything else.

A tutor of mine at Oxford had a real bugbear about the phrase "humanitarian crisis". He considered it to be a contradiction in terms. He also didn't like people using contemporary as a synonym for modern.

On the Marmite wars. In the short term it will damage Tesco more as customers can go over to ASDA, Morrisons etc and stock up there, along with their other groceries. In the longer term it will damage Unilever more as customers discover Tesco sell a commoditised version of Marmite at a much lower price. The dispute tests how much brands are worth, including Tesco's brand. It's a massive issue for both firms as a lot of their value derives from their brands. I think both parties will be looking to put it to bed quickly.

JosiasJessop said:

Patrick said:

FWIW I prefer Bovril. Is that also a Unilever product? Made in the UK?

According to Wiki, made in Burton-on-Trent and South Africa.

I lived near Burton as a child, and the smells over the town were always quite nice. Unlike the Nestle factory in nearby Hatton, where the smell of coffee was always rather too strong.

As an aside, my dad used to drive past the Nestle factory, roll down his window and shout 'Maxwell House!" at the workers...

Its campaign season at the moment for the sugar beet factory at Newark. We get a burnt earth smell across the town for a few weeks each year and whilst most people would probably hate it I love it as it reminds me of home and also of the approach of winter.

JohnLilburne said:

Dadge said:

IanB2 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

+1

Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.

I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.

What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.

I think our policy is to wait for Putin to die. He won't be around for ever.

Polonium cocktail anyone?

edmundintokyo said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

edmundintokyo said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

foxinsoxuk said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Old hack teaches young inexperienced leftie hack Faisal to do some research about Marmite.

Andrew Neil Retweeted
Fredd Says @FreddSays
1.Multi-part tweets don't work.2. Main ingredient is yeast sludge from breweries.Not imported.Will you ever do your bloody homework?@afneil https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/786327158037868544 …

I would also add.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/food/article-3023880/One-Midlands-factory-makes-world-s-Marmite-intrepid-reporter-loathes-stuff-astonished-there.html

The boss of Tesco probably knows that. Does the Head of Unilever?

I suspect he does. Unilever owns Marmite!

Kraft Foods own Vegemite, but the slide in Sterling vs the Aus $ has been pretty steep, so up in cost by 18%, making good old British Marmite a bargain at just 10% up.

We know Unilever owns Marmite. It seems the head of Unilever is unaware it is made entirely in Britain and so is not subject to exchange rate pressures.

That doesn't follow, unless the main ingredient of marmite is fresh English seaside air and their plants are powered by cockneys peddling little bicycles.

It follows when their main ingredient is a waste product from something else that is also made in this country.

Nope, still bollocks.

Yep. That is exactly what you are talking.

Boris talking about looking at more "kinetic" options in Syria.

What an absolute tosser, totally out of his depth using words he think are sexy, of which he has absolutely no idea of the implications.

FF43 said:

On the Marmite wars. In the short term it will damage Tesco more as customers can go over to ASDA, Morrisons etc and stock up there, along with their other groceries. In the longer term it will damage Unilever more as customers discover Tesco sell a commoditised version of Marmite at a much lower price. The dispute tests how much brands are worth, including Tesco's brand. It's a massive issue for both firms as a lot of their value derives from their brands. I think both parties will be looking to put it to bed quickly.

Ah, but who makes Tesco's fake marmite for them?

Mr. Lilburne, the Byzantines were initially delighted that penny-pinching Maurice was deposed.

Until it turned out the new emperor had a thing for mutilating people.

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

dugarbandier said:

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....

LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)

what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?

I'd list Cameron's successes as:

- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)

- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control

- SindyRef & AV

- Winning a second term.

Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....

Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.

You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....

Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...

The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.

How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?

I didn't say you were a researcher! In any case, I'm not going to bully your identity out of you - that's not nice. I more just interested in your inexplicable Damascene conversion to Mayite euroscepticism!!

I'm not a 'Mayite eurosceptic'.

I knew May personally at University, so possibly have a better measure of her than others.

I'm a Remainer who accepts we're leaving the EU.....or are those too many facts to process?

CarlottaVance was she always as shy/nervous as she comes across?

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hmmm, the UK needs to sack up

@SkyData: Wld you support British military intervention in Aleppo?
Support 46%
Oppose 37%

...if it meant conflict with Russia?
Oppose 51%
Support 31%

The West needs to accept Assad is here to stay unless and until the Syrian people in free elections decide otherwise. The sooner Assad wins against the rebels, the sooner the bombing will stop.

We need to be focusing on defeating ISIS (a much bigger threat to us), arming the Kurds (sod Turkey) and withdrawing support from the rebels, many of whom are Jihadists (sod Saudi).

Obama can't do this because he will be depicted as weak in the election campaign. Once elected, Hillary could, but she is more likely to continue to support the Saudis and drag this thing out. The most useful thing the British Government could do is to persuade her to change policy.

Don't the politicians who are desperate to interfere know the old advice? 'Always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something [or someone] worse'.
Three clear examples: Iraq, Libya, Syria ...

Trump appears to get it. Peter Hitchens gets it. Andrew Mitchell doesn't.

Assad's father had the blood of 30,000 on his hands from 1982 but this conflict is said to have killed 400,000.

IanB2 said:

Dadge said:

IanB2 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

+1

Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.

I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.

What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.

But he has the job because he would be a bigger liability (aka risk to May) anywhere else. May will just arrange for him to be abroad a bit more.

It did smoke out an anti-American, anti-West response from Corbyn. Although risky to use foreign affairs to make internal political points.

I've not commented much on the US Presidential election as it seems to provoke all sorts of reaction.

The Wisconsin numbers reported yesterday show Clinton doing about as well as Obama in 2012 which would be more than sufficient. There's still one debate to come and a lot of time for things to change but as OGH would say, it's not one contest but 50 smaller contests.

Trump's journey to 270 EVs looks incredibly difficult unless a lot of pollsters are getting things very wrong in a lot of places at the same time. It may be that the Trump supporters are a very vocal minority (on social media and forums like this) but as each person only has one vote, that amount of anger only gets you so far.

Turning it round, HRC gets to 182 with states she won't lose. Adding in PA, MI, MN, WI and Virginia gets her to 251. Add in NV, CO and NM and she's over the line at 271. That's before we've even considered OH, FL and NC. Add those plus 3/4 of ME and she's at 340.

Beyond that it gets much tougher for HRC and we would be into landslide territory. Could she win AK, AZ, SC and IA plus nick one of NE's to end up 370-168. I think that's her absolute top line and Trump's lowest possible. I haven't seen any polling to suggest she can go deeper into the red states unless there are mass GOP abstentions.

Trump can still win - of course it's possible - but national polls mean very little and the State polls are the ones to look at.

TOPPING said:

Boris talking about Remoaning Remainers.

Well of course Boris is Boris. He is also an absolute cunt.

It has always seemed strange to me that the 'c' word should be seen as a derogatory word when the majority of men seek more of it.

brokenwheel said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.

He was mostly taking the piss out of Stop The West, sorry "War", to be fair. But yes, I'm fed up with us fighting other people's wars.

It was a good line, aimed fairly at Labour, but should have been donated to a backbencher, not delivered by the Foreign Secretary. "Knockabout" is not what you expect from the Foreign Secretary. Dark threats backed up with gunboats, more so.

Jobabob said:

TOPPING said:

Boris talking about looking at more "kinetic" options in Syria.

What an absolute tosser, totally out of his depth using words he think are sexy, of which he has absolutely no idea of the implications.

Yes, it comes to something when David Davis has proved the most competent of the Three Clowns

It has always seemed strange to me that the 'c' word should be seen as a derogatory word when the majority of children get enjoyment from their antics.

rural_voter said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hmmm, the UK needs to sack up

@SkyData: Wld you support British military intervention in Aleppo?
Support 46%
Oppose 37%

...if it meant conflict with Russia?
Oppose 51%
Support 31%

The West needs to accept Assad is here to stay unless and until the Syrian people in free elections decide otherwise. The sooner Assad wins against the rebels, the sooner the bombing will stop.

We need to be focusing on defeating ISIS (a much bigger threat to us), arming the Kurds (sod Turkey) and withdrawing support from the rebels, many of whom are Jihadists (sod Saudi).

Obama can't do this because he will be depicted as weak in the election campaign. Once elected, Hillary could, but she is more likely to continue to support the Saudis and drag this thing out. The most useful thing the British Government could do is to persuade her to change policy.

Don't the politicians who are desperate to interfere know the old advice? 'Always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something [or someone] worse'.
Three clear examples: Iraq, Libya, Syria ...

Trump appears to get it. Peter Hitchens gets it. Andrew Mitchell doesn't.

Assad's father had the blood of 30,000 on his hands from 1982 but this conflict is said to have killed 400,000.

Yes - Trump seems to get it. I think it is the only thing in his favour.

Unfortunately that is likely to harden Clinton against modifying her foreign policy to recognise realpolitik. Under Clinton, the bombing (and hand-wringing) in Syria is likely to continue and the relationship with Russia is likely to heat up. I want Clinton to get the presidency rather than Trump, but this is a major downside.

On the 'c' word: it's one of the few to become harsher over the centuries. [I've actually written a blog post due to be posted tomorrow with some references to this].

Things like 'mischief' and 'naughty' used to mean thinks like popping out for a spot of rape or sexual assault.

It may simply be phonetic (harder sounds than the two words above) or could be due to the wildly differing range of slang terms and suchlike for the genitals of the genders. There are tons of todger-related euphemisms and terms, but relatively few for fairy caves. That may also be a function of tallywhackers being inherently more amusing [there's quite a bit of gender-related humour in Sir Edric].

New thread

JohnLilburne said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Lilburne, the Byzantines were initially delighted that penny-pinching Maurice was deposed.

Until it turned out the new emperor had a thing for mutilating people.

Putin's 64 and will have a succession plan. I suspect his successor will rise from the nomenklatura as he did. Don't forget he is a Chekist.

Siloviki these days, rather than nomenklatura.

More problems for Labour ... If they try too hard to stop Brexit with Parliamentary shenanigans, May could arrange to lose a vote - an excuse for a GE, and a nice three week campaign with Jeremy discussing Syria and his cunning plan to stop the violence. Non-intervention but intervening in a statesmanlike way via a request to ISIS to play nicely.

Plus his insistence to open the borders completely in a nice cuddly Trotskyite international way. Perhaps inviting ISIS to talks, thus revealing his real cunning plan - to split the nasty, revisionist racist vote between all the other parties, Blairites included, who are the worst of all.

Mr Moderator,

Thus the old joke now goes as follows. "No, you're not a vagina. A vagina's useful, you're not."

For clarity, not aimed at the moderator, of course.