@RIchard_Nabavi Are you piling on Hillary off the back of this ?
Not really, I'm trying mostly to pin a tail on the ECV bands donkey-derby. I also have an open spread bet bought at 329, which I'm happy to keep open but I might at some point derisk by a sell of Hillary on the 330-Ups
Wow. Joseph Weller is brilliant. Democracy requires 2 basic things: 1. the ability to throw the scoundrels out 2. the vote should affect the policies pursued With the EU, neither can happen, so the Euro-sceptic anger is justified.
It shouldn't require a brain the size of a planet to see this. Some say, however, that if you voted Leave you must be a racist uneducated knuckledragging mouthbreather.
Unlike Witney, the Yellow Peril have been planning for this by election for months
Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, GE2015: 58.2% Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, 2016 mayoral: 57.0%
Whether or not his campaign or his support for Brexit annoyed Liberals, it didn't much shift his support in his constituency.
The comparison between these different elections is meaningless, no?
Never mind Heathrow, This by election will be about the Government's direction over Brexit, which will likely make both Zac and any putative continuity Conservative candidate very vulnerable in this seat.
Wow. Joseph Weller is brilliant. Democracy requires 2 basic things: 1. the ability to throw the scoundrels out 2. the vote should affect the policies pursued With the EU, neither can happen, so the Euro-sceptic anger is justified.
It shouldn't require a brain the size of a planet to see this. Some say, however, that if you voted Leave you must be a racist uneducated knuckledragging mouthbreather.
Agreed. It was the clarity and succinctness of his argument that wowed me.
'Except he's failed to deliver on his personal manifesto and deserves to be punished for it. This will be all about hard Brexit and in a very anti Brexit area there's lots of scope to send Cruella a message. I think it just might get sent.'
If the Lib Dems can't win this then it confirms they are past their sell- by date in national politics.
Unlike Witney, the Yellow Peril have been planning for this by election for months
Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, GE2015: 58.2% Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, 2016 mayoral: 57.0%
Whether or not his campaign or his support for Brexit annoyed Liberals, it didn't much shift his support in his constituency.
The comparison between these different elections is meaningless, no?
Never mind Heathrow, This by election will be about the Government's direction over Brexit, which will likely make both Zac and any putative continuity Conservative candidate very vulnerable in this seat.
I'm loving the denial though..
But Richmond London Borough HEAVILY voted to REMAIN anyway, so it will hardly be a surprise if he loses, no?
@RIchard_Nabavi Are you piling on Hillary off the back of this ?
Not really, I'm trying mostly to pin a tail on the ECV bands donkey-derby. I also have an open spread bet bought at 329, which I'm happy to keep open but I might at some point derisk by a sell of Hillary on the 330-Ups
If you sell now at 23.5, you've effectively turned your 329 buy into a
305.5 buy with 24.5 units fixed profit from 330 upwards.
Unlike Witney, the Yellow Peril have been planning for this by election for months
Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, GE2015: 58.2% Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, 2016 mayoral: 57.0%
Whether or not his campaign or his support for Brexit annoyed Liberals, it didn't much shift his support in his constituency.
The comparison between these different elections is meaningless, no?
Never mind Heathrow, This by election will be about the Government's direction over Brexit, which will likely make both Zac and any putative continuity Conservative candidate very vulnerable in this seat.
I'm loving the denial though..
Mike used to keep telling us that very few votes are determined by Europe, and in terms if the minutiae of possible Brexit alternatives, I'm sure he's right.
But I was simply pointing out that this notion that Zac has lost a whole bunch of support because of the nature of his mayoral campaign - which is a theme on my twitter-feed at the moment - is simply not sustained by the evidence. Were that the case, he would have done much worse in his constituency this May.
It would be amusing if Independent Zac, the LD and an Official Tory all took great slugs out of each other's vote and the Labour candidate sneaked through.
If Corbyn can win Richmond Park, then Landslide 2020 surely beckons for the deluded Corbynista lefties? :-)
I don't know whether it will remain the case, but at the moment the effect of Zac's actions is to focus a lot of the media attention on him personally rather than on the wider issue of opposition to the decision. That's actually quite helpful to Theresa May.
It would be amusing if Independent Zac, the LD and an Official Tory all took great slugs out of each other's vote and the Labour candidate sneaked through.
If Corbyn can win Richmond Park, then Landslide 2020 surely beckons for the deluded Corbynista lefties? :-)
It would be a great bet to deploy all your winnings from Trump's victory?
I don't know whether it will remain the case, but at the moment the effect of Zac's actions is to focus a lot of the media attention on him personally rather than on the wider issue of opposition to the decision. That's actually quite helpful to Theresa May.
I think that's helped by the lack of resignations from Boris and Greening. If either one of those had gone today then the focus would really be on the decision, Zac, an outspoken opponent of Heathrow, resigning the whip just doesn't have the same pull factor.
I don't know whether it will remain the case, but at the moment the effect of Zac's actions is to focus a lot of the media attention on him personally rather than on the wider issue of opposition to the decision. That's actually quite helpful to Theresa May.
...and when they do eventually go wider it won't be on the broad support the decision has across the country but on the Nimbyish opposition...
I do have fond memories of Heathrow as a kid. Mum and dad would drive me all the way from Ilford across central London and then down the M4 several weekends a year just so that I could view the planes from the top of car park 3. Of course, back in the 1980s, parking was something like 20p for a whole afternoon
Surely if the Conservatives (I doubt they will) run a candidate other than Zac in Richmond Park he or she will be pro-Heathrow ? Otherwise whats the point
Why should they be? The constituency is overwhelmingly anti-Heathrow for obvious reasons, and the MP is likely to reflect that. A pro-Heathrow candidate would be electoral suicide.
That an MP (prospective MP) differs from the party line (and not a manifesto party line at that) isn't surprising on this sort of issue. It isn't like a Tory MP being anti-tax cuts or a Labour MP wanting to abolish the NHS or something.
@RIchard_Nabavi Are you piling on Hillary off the back of this ?
Not really, I'm trying mostly to pin a tail on the ECV bands donkey-derby. I also have an open spread bet bought at 329, which I'm happy to keep open but I might at some point derisk by a sell of Hillary on the 330-Ups
If you sell now at 23.5, you've effectively turned your 329 buy into a
305.5 buy with 24.5 units fixed profit from 330 upwards.
Yes, exactly (except it's a 23.5 fixed profit). So what I need to decide is whether the 23 and a half birds in my hands from 330 up to 353 are worth more than the extra birds in the 354 bushes upwards. (Also of course any losses in the lower regions are mitigated by 23.5 points as well). Plus, if I decide they are, I have to try to judge the optimal moment to grab them.
I've only ever used LHR once (inbound, so no experience at all of departures), but it didn't seem greatly better or worse than other really big airports. Doesn't mean I liked it. Give me a train any day.
I do have fond memories of Heathrow as a kid. Mum and dad would drive me all the way from Ilford across central London and then down the M4 several weekends a year just so that I could view the planes from the top of car park 3. Of course, back in the 1980s, parking was something like 20p for a whole afternoon
And you kept finding your way back home?
Back in those days, yes
Yesterday, I did the train from Castle Cary to Yeovil Junction for the first time (including the recently re-opened Yeovil Pen Mill to Yeovil Junction curve), as well Frome to Bruton.
Back on Friday, I did Liverpool to Manchester via Newton-le-Willows (dates back to 1830!), and Manchester to Liverpool via Warrington.
What a plonker Goldsmith is. Single constituency votes don't decide national policy. Boring!
Meanwhile, Betfair midprices for the US election, for every candidate or non-candidate whom it's possible to lay as well as back, are as follows:
Clinton 1.205 Sanders 265 Biden 900
Trump 6.1 Pence 825
Sanders is well ahead of the lower-placed possibilities. Who's backing him? Surely if something were to happen to Clinton, her replacement would be Kaine?
I think the actual money going on the more exotic choices is negligible.
But Kaine wouldn't necessarily be the choice were Clinton to die between now and when the electoral college meets. Members of the electoral college pledged to Clinton would need to decide what to do, presumably on advice from the Democrat National Committee. There would be a good case for Kaine (who's on the ballot) but also some case for Sanders (who ran Clinton fairly close in the primaries and still has decent favourability ratings). Or a compromise candidate may emerge (e.g. Biden for continuity if he could be prevailed upon).
The Betfair market is going mental. Clinton in to 1.195, Trump out to 7.3 (back them at 1.19 and 7.2 for a 2% profit if either wins) and... ...Sanders in to 110
Although the mayoral election was essentially a forced choice conservative vs labour, so that may not be a perfect comparison.
Plus there's a good case for believing your (ex)MP will favour or at least take greater interest in his constituency than other choices. So a fairly apolitical voter may well go for their local candidate for mayor even if they wouldn't necessarily support him at a GE.
The Terminal 5 inquiry took four years and cost £80 million. In comparison, the AV referendum cost £75 million.
Perhaps, on projects that are deemed of national importance such as LHR3, we should have a quicker process where there is a short period for objections and replanning, followed by a national referendum on it?
If it's of importance to the nation, a few NIMBYs should not be able to block it, and cost the taxpayer a fortune in the process.
The Terminal 5 inquiry took four years and cost £80 million. In comparison, the AV referendum cost £75 million.
Perhaps, on projects that are deemed of national importance such as LHR3, we should have a quicker process where there is a short period for objections and replanning, followed by a national referendum on it?
If it's of importance to the nation, a few NIMBYs should not be able to block it, and cost the taxpayer a fortune in the process.
Then it goes ahead anyway. And they get compensation.
The Betfair market is going mental. Clinton in to 1.195, Trump out to 7.3 (back them at 1.19 and 7.2 for a 2% profit if either wins) and... ...Sanders in to 110
I guess ABC at Clinton +12 maybe focussing minds. Even Rasmussen have her +1 this afternoon.
The Terminal 5 inquiry took four years and cost £80 million. In comparison, the AV referendum cost £75 million.
Perhaps, on projects that are deemed of national importance such as LHR3, we should have a quicker process where there is a short period for objections and replanning, followed by a national referendum on it?
If it's of importance to the nation, a few NIMBYs should not be able to block it, and cost the taxpayer a fortune in the process.
Then it goes ahead anyway. And they get compensation.
The Terminal 5 inquiry took four years and cost £80 million. In comparison, the AV referendum cost £75 million.
Perhaps, on projects that are deemed of national importance such as LHR3, we should have a quicker process where there is a short period for objections and replanning, followed by a national referendum on it?
If it's of importance to the nation, a few NIMBYs should not be able to block it, and cost the taxpayer a fortune in the process.
Then it goes ahead anyway. And they get compensation.
What was the point?
It may not pass a referendum; The NIMBYs may not be in line for compensation.
But it is clear that the current process is archaic, slow and does not work.
What a plonker Goldsmith is. Single constituency votes don't decide national policy. Boring!
Meanwhile, Betfair midprices for the US election, for every candidate or non-candidate whom it's possible to lay as well as back, are as follows:
Clinton 1.205 Sanders 265 Biden 900
Trump 6.1 Pence 825
Sanders is well ahead of the lower-placed possibilities. Who's backing him? Surely if something were to happen to Clinton, her replacement would be Kaine?
I think the actual money going on the more exotic choices is negligible.
But Kaine wouldn't necessarily be the choice were Clinton to die between now and when the electoral college meets. Members of the electoral college pledged to Clinton would need to decide what to do, presumably on advice from the Democrat National Committee. There would be a good case for Kaine (who's on the ballot) but also some case for Sanders (who ran Clinton fairly close in the primaries and still has decent favourability ratings). Or a compromise candidate may emerge (e.g. Biden for continuity if he could be prevailed upon).
Betfair say they will settle the market "according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2016 presidential election" and "(a)ny subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market." If Clinton were to be out by 8 Nov, I think replacing her with anyone other than Kaine would lose votes. After 8 Nov and before the EC "meets" on 19 Dec the DNC would have a freer hand, but their choice (probably) wouldn't affect who Betfair pay out on.
That's comparing Off year to presidential though. There should be a Dem surge compared to offyear voting given how shit Dems are at turning up for non-presidential years.
The Betfair market is going mental. Clinton in to 1.195, Trump out to 7.3 (back them at 1.19 and 7.2 for a 2% profit if either wins) and... ...Sanders in to 110
I'd be very, very careful on reading Betfair prices on long odds shots due to the extremely low volumes. A few quid will appear to move a 1000-1 outsider to 100-1 (or even less - some of it is just people taking offers off the table rather than matching bets). The Clinton v Trump moves are interesting... those for Sanders, Biden, Penelope Pitstop or anyone else less so.
Unlike Witney, the Yellow Peril have been planning for this by election for months
Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, GE2015: 58.2% Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, 2016 mayoral: 57.0%
Whether or not his campaign or his support for Brexit annoyed Liberals, it didn't much shift his support in his constituency.
Although the mayoral election was essentially a forced choice conservative vs labour, so that may not be a perfect comparison.
It wouldn't be a fair comparison for the Lab or LD vote but I think the Con one is more valid. (Of course, as an SV vote, it *should* be possible for people to vote without tactical considerations in the first round assuming that the run-off is clear enough, but voters seem to skip the middle man and 'transfer' in anticipation).
Mr. Taffys, words fail me. What's Hammond thinking? Is he thinking?
That the Bank of England must be independent. It's better to take any short term hit that might arise from that than introduce political interference at the Bank. Carney will announce that he is not going to seek another term pretty soon anyway so the Bank will undergo a change of ethos anyway. No need to rock the boat.
So, a LibDem elected to replace Zac is going to stop Brexit in its tracks is it?
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
Pretty silly comment on two main grounds.
Firstly, people wouldn't largely be voting LD to stop Brexit in its tracks but to shift away from hard Brexit and towards preserving single market freedoms. Would it work? Well, there are a fair few seats like Richmond which voted Tory in 2015 and Remain in 2016, and it would certainly give May pause on the strategy.
Secondly, Zac was the one who pledged to step down if he didn't get his way on a particular issue. Why on God's green earth would you possibly think the Lib Dems ought to be bound by a pledge made by a different MP from a different party on a different matter?!
Mr. Max, if the Bank of England requires approval for policies that harm the UK economy then declining is a good thing.
On the independence of interest rate setting, it's also appropriate to point out when they're crackers. I hope you're right about Carney sodding off soon, but he can still cause damage in the meantime.
Mr. Glenn, one hopes Carney is paying attention. Growth is fine, inflation is rising, the pound is declining.
It would take a drunken lunatic to conclude cutting rates is the right remedy. We need a rate rise back to the dizzying heights of 0.5%.
But that would require the Governor to effectively admit he was wrong before. So, which weighs more: economic reality or Carney's ego?
Economic reality is that the pound was over valued. Assuming the current level is about right it will now probably overshoot a bit and then correct itself. The only unknown is what is the pounds actual value $1.20, $1.10?
Mr. Glenn, one hopes Carney is paying attention. Growth is fine, inflation is rising, the pound is declining.
It would take a drunken lunatic to conclude cutting rates is the right remedy. We need a rate rise back to the dizzying heights of 0.5%.
But that would require the Governor to effectively admit he was wrong before. So, which weighs more: economic reality or Carney's ego?
Economic reality is that the pound was over valued. Assuming the current level is about right it will now probably overshoot a bit and then correct itself. The only unknown is what is the pounds actual value $1.20, $1.10?
What a plonker Goldsmith is. Single constituency votes don't decide national policy. Boring!
Meanwhile, Betfair midprices for the US election, for every candidate or non-candidate whom it's possible to lay as well as back, are as follows:
Clinton 1.205 Sanders 265 Biden 900
Trump 6.1 Pence 825
Sanders is well ahead of the lower-placed possibilities. Who's backing him? Surely if something were to happen to Clinton, her replacement would be Kaine?
I think the actual money going on the more exotic choices is negligible.
But Kaine wouldn't necessarily be the choice were Clinton to die between now and when the electoral college meets. Members of the electoral college pledged to Clinton would need to decide what to do, presumably on advice from the Democrat National Committee. There would be a good case for Kaine (who's on the ballot) but also some case for Sanders (who ran Clinton fairly close in the primaries and still has decent favourability ratings). Or a compromise candidate may emerge (e.g. Biden for continuity if he could be prevailed upon).
Betfair say they will settle the market "according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2016 presidential election" and "(a)ny subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market." If Clinton were to be out by 8 Nov, I think replacing her with anyone other than Kaine would lose votes. After 8 Nov and before the EC "meets" on 19 Dec the DNC would have a freer hand, but their choice (probably) wouldn't affect who Betfair pay out on.
In a previous election (1880?), Greeley died and votes that were cast for him were assessed by the Senate as null and void in their role of ratifying the result. Precedent would therefore suggest that if a candidate died, they couldn't receive any votes, whether or not any elector cast their vote for him or her - and hence they couldn't have 'the most projected Electoral College votes'. Were Trump or Clinton to die after Nov 8, it shouldn't affect Betfair's settlement as it's fairly clear that they're taking the position as at election day (or night); were they to die beforehand, that'd be a different matter and one would hope that clarification would be given (unless Trump won outright, in which case the Democrats' problems would be irrelevant).
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Mr. Glenn, one hopes Carney is paying attention. Growth is fine, inflation is rising, the pound is declining.
It would take a drunken lunatic to conclude cutting rates is the right remedy. We need a rate rise back to the dizzying heights of 0.5%.
But that would require the Governor to effectively admit he was wrong before. So, which weighs more: economic reality or Carney's ego?
Economic reality is that the pound was over valued. Assuming the current level is about right it will now probably overshoot a bit and then correct itself. The only unknown is what is the pounds actual value $1.20, $1.10?
So, a LibDem elected to replace Zac is going to stop Brexit in its tracks is it?
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
Pretty silly comment on two main grounds.
Firstly, people wouldn't largely be voting LD to stop Brexit in its tracks but to shift away from hard Brexit and towards preserving single market freedoms. Would it work? Well, there are a fair few seats like Richmond which voted Tory in 2015 and Remain in 2016, and it would certainly give May pause on the strategy.
Secondly, Zac was the one who pledged to step down if he didn't get his way on a particular issue. Why on God's green earth would you possibly think the Lib Dems ought to be bound by a pledge made by a different MP from a different party on a different matter?!
Firstly.... Would it give May reason to pause on the strategy? Nah - she's more likely to press the Article 50 button sooner to move the debate on. We'll ask the LibDem candidate at the hustings if she (assuming it is the candidate we are expecting) will push for the UK to rejoin the EU once Article 50 is triggered. Anything less than "yes" will be pounced on as equivocating. And "yes" will be pounced on too. Would you join the Euro? A European Army? Schengen? etc etc.
Seeing people voted Remain in the constituency and equating that with having a pro-EU stance is deeply flawed.
Secondly... Why on God's green earth would I expect a LibeDem candidate to have the integrity to make a promise to the voters and the stand by it? Well, you said it.....
Unlike Witney, the Yellow Peril have been planning for this by election for months
Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, GE2015: 58.2% Zac's share of the vote in Richmond Park, 2016 mayoral: 57.0%
Whether or not his campaign or his support for Brexit annoyed Liberals, it didn't much shift his support in his constituency.
The comparison between these different elections is meaningless, no?
Never mind Heathrow, This by election will be about the Government's direction over Brexit, which will likely make both Zac and any putative continuity Conservative candidate very vulnerable in this seat.
I'm loving the denial though..
Mike used to keep telling us that very few votes are determined by Europe, and in terms if the minutiae of possible Brexit alternatives, I'm sure he's right.
But I was simply pointing out that this notion that Zac has lost a whole bunch of support because of the nature of his mayoral campaign - which is a theme on my twitter-feed at the moment - is simply not sustained by the evidence. Were that the case, he would have done much worse in his constituency this May.
I don't think it would have mattered particularly for Zac in 2015 or even in the mayoral, but Brexit is now a reality so that will sharpen remainer minds somewhat. More importantly, it won't be a vote against Zac because he supports Brexit, it will be a protest vote against Brexit generally, and against the government. It's essentially a good opportunity for any remainers to give the government a bloody nose and say "hey! we're still here you know!". Zac will just be collateral damage.
So, a LibDem elected to replace Zac is going to stop Brexit in its tracks is it?
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
Why would they be a hypocrite, have the Lib Dems said it was the right thing to do, resigning? Seems all pretty self centered to me, much like David Davis in 2008.
Also, Zac's strong personal vote may not be that much use in the end - just as it wasn't really for the LDs in 2015 (so ironically they would be the beneficiaries this time!)
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mr. Taffys, words fail me. What's Hammond thinking? Is he thinking?
That the Bank of England must be independent. It's better to take any short term hit that might arise from that than introduce political interference at the Bank. Carney will announce that he is not going to seek another term pretty soon anyway so the Bank will undergo a change of ethos anyway. No need to rock the boat.
The Bank of England is *operationally* independent but still has to operate within broad government guidelines. If Hammond is required to sign off QE then he has to make a real decision; he can't simply say that it's delegated and that he's nothing more than a rubber stamp. It may be that there are reasons to keep his mind open on further QE though were I in No 11, I'd be reiterating that the BoE is tasked to aim for 2% inflation, that it should set its monetary policy accordingly and that it will be held to account on that target.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Con 1: We shouldn't do anything to assist the FibDems - like splitting the Tory vote. Like · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs Con 2 If Zac stands as an independent it is he who is splitting the Tory vote.
I imagine the leafy streets of Richmond are agitated at the moment - by Brexit, Heathrow, having to turn out for another vote. I could see a polite rebellion, not necessarily in favour of Mr Goldsmith.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Urban myth. Kennedy would have won even if Illinois had gone the other way.
Comments
1. the ability to throw the scoundrels out
2. the vote should affect the policies pursued
With the EU, neither can happen, so the Euro-sceptic anger is justified.
It shouldn't require a brain the size of a planet to see this. Some say, however, that if you voted Leave you must be a racist uneducated knuckledragging mouthbreather.
Never mind Heathrow, This by election will be about the Government's direction over Brexit, which will likely make both Zac and any putative continuity Conservative candidate very vulnerable in this seat.
I'm loving the denial though..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/25/hillary-clinton-is-the-democrats-gordon-brown--a-towering-candid/
Brown v Farage - the US choice from hell.
'Except he's failed to deliver on his personal manifesto and deserves to be punished for it. This will be all about hard Brexit and in a very anti Brexit area there's lots of scope to send Cruella a message. I think it just might get sent.'
If the Lib Dems can't win this then it confirms they are past their sell- by date in national politics.
305.5 buy with 24.5 units fixed profit from 330 upwards.
But I was simply pointing out that this notion that Zac has lost a whole bunch of support because of the nature of his mayoral campaign - which is a theme on my twitter-feed at the moment - is simply not sustained by the evidence. Were that the case, he would have done much worse in his constituency this May.
Pew Research
NEW: The political environment on social media https://t.co/LJE65SJRuX
If Corbyn can win Richmond Park, then Landslide 2020 surely beckons for the deluded Corbynista lefties? :-)
How we got to this, and the implications of what might happen, are endlessly and utterly fascinating.
iVotronic voting machines are changing votes in Arkansas. https://t.co/DmrKQMWD4O
That an MP (prospective MP) differs from the party line (and not a manifesto party line at that) isn't surprising on this sort of issue. It isn't like a Tory MP being anti-tax cuts or a Labour MP wanting to abolish the NHS or something.
Electronic voting is just mad.
im sensing a pattern in early voting so far...
Trouble is, its not news. It's a report by a hate obsessed reporter citing nobody. Nobody charged. Nobody found guilty. No witnesses. No names.
Still, in the modern Clinton campaign, any allegation of Trump wrong doing is automatically the gospel truth.
Yesterday, I did the train from Castle Cary to Yeovil Junction for the first time (including the recently re-opened Yeovil Pen Mill to Yeovil Junction curve), as well Frome to Bruton.
Back on Friday, I did Liverpool to Manchester via Newton-le-Willows (dates back to 1830!), and Manchester to Liverpool via Warrington.
F1: Malaysia may leave the calendar due to lack of money:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37759494
A shame. Not a bad circuit, certainly compared to the tiresome likes of Monaco and Azerbaijan.
Wikileaks
RELEASE: The Podesta Emails Part 18 #PodestaEmails #PodestaEmails18 #HillaryClinton https://t.co/wzxeh70oUm https://t.co/TiLBnj73f4
But Kaine wouldn't necessarily be the choice were Clinton to die between now and when the electoral college meets. Members of the electoral college pledged to Clinton would need to decide what to do, presumably on advice from the Democrat National Committee. There would be a good case for Kaine (who's on the ballot) but also some case for Sanders (who ran Clinton fairly close in the primaries and still has decent favourability ratings). Or a compromise candidate may emerge (e.g. Biden for continuity if he could be prevailed upon).
Clinton in to 1.195,
Trump out to 7.3 (back them at 1.19 and 7.2 for a 2% profit if either wins)
and...
...Sanders in to 110
The Terminal 5 inquiry took four years and cost £80 million. In comparison, the AV referendum cost £75 million.
Perhaps, on projects that are deemed of national importance such as LHR3, we should have a quicker process where there is a short period for objections and replanning, followed by a national referendum on it?
If it's of importance to the nation, a few NIMBYs should not be able to block it, and cost the taxpayer a fortune in the process.
Then it goes ahead anyway. And they get compensation.
What was the point?
I have an open heavy lay on him ;p
It would take a drunken lunatic to conclude cutting rates is the right remedy. We need a rate rise back to the dizzying heights of 0.5%.
But that would require the Governor to effectively admit he was wrong before. So, which weighs more: economic reality or Carney's ego?
The NIMBYs may not be in line for compensation.
But it is clear that the current process is archaic, slow and does not work.
https://youtu.be/Zt1tADOWJ8Y
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
What a coincidence...
No wonder the pound is falling
Firstly, people wouldn't largely be voting LD to stop Brexit in its tracks but to shift away from hard Brexit and towards preserving single market freedoms. Would it work? Well, there are a fair few seats like Richmond which voted Tory in 2015 and Remain in 2016, and it would certainly give May pause on the strategy.
Secondly, Zac was the one who pledged to step down if he didn't get his way on a particular issue. Why on God's green earth would you possibly think the Lib Dems ought to be bound by a pledge made by a different MP from a different party on a different matter?!
On the independence of interest rate setting, it's also appropriate to point out when they're crackers. I hope you're right about Carney sodding off soon, but he can still cause damage in the meantime.
Mr. Mark, or the Year of the Verstappen Tip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3smwlrSiWY&spfreload=1
Little rattled after Witney perhaps...
What you put the fair value of GBP at ?
Seeing people voted Remain in the constituency and equating that with having a pro-EU stance is deeply flawed.
Secondly... Why on God's green earth would I expect a LibeDem candidate to have the integrity to make a promise to the voters and the stand by it? Well, you said it.....
I find Labour quite decent folk by comparison.
A by-election is a free hit against the Government.
I wouldn't comment so much on this, but I'm procrastinating, so...
Which reminds me, time to look at the Mexico markets.
Con 1: We shouldn't do anything to assist the FibDems - like splitting the Tory vote.
Like · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs
Con 2 If Zac stands as an independent it is he who is splitting the Tory vote.
I presume you'd have preferred no Coalition and a minority Government in 2010. Perhaps you should have told Cameron...