politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Unless the betting is wildly wrong Paul Nuttall looks set to b
Comments
-
Well I suppose neither do you, and judging by previous emails there will probably be some marked with a mysterious 'C'. It was also trivialising it to suggest it was just "someone Hillary knew".Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story-1 -
Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/0 -
Also, if Brawn does replace Ecclestone, with Todt as FIA President one imagines they'd be as close as Mosley and Ecclestone were (Todt was Ferrari team principal when Brawn was chief technical officer).
Edited extra bit: think I got the job descriptions right...0 -
So Kasich has broken his word ;JackW said:Rubio implies he voted for Trump yesterday :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303709-voting-early-rubio-implies-he-cast-ballot-for-trump
But Kasich voted for McCain by write-in :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303693-kasich-votes-for-mccain-instead-of-trump
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/03/03/all_four_candidates_pledge_to_support_gop_nominee.html
0 -
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story0 -
Pretty conclusive then that Rubio wasn't fit to be the candidate either.JackW said:Rubio implies he voted for Trump yesterday :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303709-voting-early-rubio-implies-he-cast-ballot-for-trump
But Kasich voted for McCain by write-in :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303693-kasich-votes-for-mccain-instead-of-trump0 -
The voters never fail to confound ....Jobabob said:
Lifelong GOP supporter (now voting for Hillary): "Clinton basically trotted out the socialist manifesto. But the released WikiLeaks transcripts of her paid speeches were very comforting to me."JackW said:Seth Stevenson of the "Slate" re-interviews a panel of 13 GOP voters, who had concerns about Trump becoming their nominee, to see who they will be voting for :
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/gop_voters_who_don_t_like_trump_reveal_their_votes.html
I believe the tired and traditional PB cliche for moments like this is "heart of stone not to laugh etc"..
A "much chortling in the library moment" for me was some Jill Stein voters (Green candidate) moving to David Duke of KKK infamy ....
0 -
He's clearly no Zac Goldsmith ....MonikerDiCanio said:So Kasich has broken his word ;
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/03/03/all_four_candidates_pledge_to_support_gop_nominee.html
0 -
Well he's their man now. Any more egregious behaviour and I know where the fingers will point.Blue_rog said:
They're all as bad as each other. No wonder trust in politicians and voter turnout are at an all time low.RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-2483520 -
Cuckoo, Hillary bricking it by looks of itFrancisUrquhart said:
Intriguing....Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/793208373235871744FrancisUrquhart said:
Link?Y0kel said:Trump and the Russians , 2.
Alfa Bank and the potentially strange transactional relationship and methods with the Trump Organisation
Stuff seems to be floating to the surface at the moment. Proper stuff.0 -
I really don't get it; what's the justification for this?Black_Rook said:Tim Montgomerie on the latest Keith Vaz lunacy:
https://twitter.com/montie/status/793208647853699072
Quite right. If, in ten or twenty years time, we have a full-on Trump eruption here and the political establishment tries to appeal to reason, voters will be perfectly entitled to say "look what you did" and tell them to fuck right off.
If you create a culture with no shame, then you forfeit not merely the right but the ability to call out shameless behaviour.0 -
I'm surprised Rubio did that. Perfect ammunition for the Dems. New attack ad coming in 3 .. 2 .. 1 ...rottenborough said:
Pretty conclusive then that Rubio wasn't fit to be the candidate either.JackW said:Rubio implies he voted for Trump yesterday :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303709-voting-early-rubio-implies-he-cast-ballot-for-trump
But Kasich voted for McCain by write-in :
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303693-kasich-votes-for-mccain-instead-of-trump0 -
That's quite significant information. Nate Silver rates Franklin and Marshall B+, but adjusts their results by reducing Clinton's lead by 2 points. This new poll was conducted about half after the FBI's intervention. The lead of 11 points is 2 points more than in their last poll, done from 28 Sep-2 Oct. According to 538, Clinton's national poll lead at that time was 2-3%.JackW said:Pennsylvania - Franklin & Marshall - Sample 863 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 49 .. Trump 38
http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/913809798323927231-f-m-poll-release-october-2016.pdf
But comparisons aside, on those figures, Pennsylvania would obviously still be out of reach for Trump.0 -
I commented earlier on this, though I'd not seen the voting figures showing that Vaz actually mainly got Tory votes. The whips want the system to work, and MPs aren't keen to bash one of their number who hasn't been convicted of anything. Removing him from the chair of the committee seems a reasonable sanction.dugarbandier said:
there but for the grace of god?RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
0 -
Ferrari International Assistance on the way back? I've missed it.Morris_Dancer said:Also, if Brawn does replace Ecclestone, with Todt as FIA President one imagines they'd be as close as Mosley and Ecclestone were (Todt was Ferrari team principal when Brawn was chief technical officer).
Edited extra bit: think I got the job descriptions right...0 -
THere has never been democracy hereInnocent_Abroad said:
Representative democracy is finished across the pond. I expect us to follow fairly soon.DavidL said:
Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of HRC, at least in her later years. I don't think she is lazy but most of the other epithets fit. She served competently as a Senator, she played an important role as First Lady, she had a mixed record at State. My concerns about her are that she epitomises Washington corruption. There was a devastating piece in the WSJ the other day about her monetising her time at State. It's shocking and not healthy for American democracy. But the alternative....jeez.ydoethur said:
The problem is that that's a highly inaccurate characterisation of Clinton. In 30 years, what has she actually achieved? If so much, why does she not shout them from the rooftops? What is her real grasp of the issues? If it's so good, why is she unable to formulate detailed policy and communicate it? Why has she been under criminal investigation three times that we know of? If she's a dedicated public servant, she shouldn't even have been investigated once.DavidL said:Do you want a lifelong public servant with an encyclopedic grasp of the issues, or a buffoon guided only by his own prejudices?"
If Clinton were what the WP says, this election would have been over months ago and probably Trump would have taken Indiana and nowhere else. It is precisely because she is an incompetent, lazy, arrogant and unpleasant sleazeball that Trump (who is correctly described) is still in the running.
Who was it said that any candidate other than Clinton would undoubtedly beat Trump, and any candidate other than Trump would undoubtedly beat Clinton? I have seen nothing to suggest they were wrong. The loser is the US democratic process.0 -
The voting list (via OrderOrder):NickPalmer said:
I commented earlier on this, though I'd not seen the voting figures showing that Vaz actually mainly got Tory votes. The whips want the system to work, and MPs aren't keen to bash one of their number who hasn't been convicted of anything. Removing him from the chair of the committee seems a reasonable sanction.dugarbandier said:
there but for the grace of god?RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-2483520 -
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?TonyE said:
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story0 -
National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 3,145 - 1 Nov
Clinton 43.3 .. Trump 46.9
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/0 -
Quite so .... One pillar of FOP is falling away for Trump ....Chris said:
That's quite significant information. Nate Silver rates Franklin and Marshall B+, but adjusts their results by reducing Clinton's lead by 2 points. This new poll was conducted about half after the FBI's intervention. The lead of 11 points is 2 points more than in their last poll, done from 28 Sep-2 Oct. According to 538, Clinton's national poll lead at that time was 2-3%.JackW said:Pennsylvania - Franklin & Marshall - Sample 863 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 49 .. Trump 38
http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/913809798323927231-f-m-poll-release-october-2016.pdf
But comparisons aside, on those figures, Pennsylvania would obviously still be out of reach for Trump.
Have I mentioned FOP before ? .... 0 -
I think it's pretty sad that they have chosen this route. It brings Parliament into disrepute in the eyes of the general public who generally don't care for the 'process' itself but want to see some integrity and backbone.NickPalmer said:
I commented earlier on this, though I'd not seen the voting figures showing that Vaz actually mainly got Tory votes. The whips want the system to work, and MPs aren't keen to bash one of their number who hasn't been convicted of anything. Removing him from the chair of the committee seems a reasonable sanction.dugarbandier said:
there but for the grace of god?RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
Labour of course, might have used its own influence to alter the course of events without breaking the process though.0 -
Lol.rottenborough said:
The voting list (via OrderOrder):NickPalmer said:
I commented earlier on this, though I'd not seen the voting figures showing that Vaz actually mainly got Tory votes. The whips want the system to work, and MPs aren't keen to bash one of their number who hasn't been convicted of anything. Removing him from the chair of the committee seems a reasonable sanction.dugarbandier said:
there but for the grace of god?RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
'As a result 159 of the 203 MPs who voted for Vaz were Tories'.
That heart of stone's getting a right old battering.0 -
It smells like a deal's been done - you vote for Vaz, we'll let you do X.TonyE said:
I think it's pretty sad that they have chosen this route. It brings Parliament into disrepute in the eyes of the general public who generally don't care for the 'process' itself but want to see some integrity and backbone.NickPalmer said:
I commented earlier on this, though I'd not seen the voting figures showing that Vaz actually mainly got Tory votes. The whips want the system to work, and MPs aren't keen to bash one of their number who hasn't been convicted of anything. Removing him from the chair of the committee seems a reasonable sanction.dugarbandier said:
there but for the grace of god?RobD said:What were the whips thinking??
http://order-order.com/2016/11/01/tory-whips-saved-vaz/#more-248352
Labour of course, might have used its own influence to alter the course of events without breaking the process though.0 -
That sentence is worth singling out, as it is relevant to politics again and again. If you accuse the Queen, or Theresa May, or Jeremy Corbyn, or anyone else of a hideous crime, the police have to investigate it - however, briefly. If they decide you were motivated by spite, the investigation may be rapid, or they may give it low priority, as happened to me when a far-right group mischievously accused me of inciting racial hatred of Arabs (I'd made a joke about the Taliban) - the police put it aside for over a year as they were too busy to get round to dismissing it.FF43 said:
Being investigated is no particular evidence of wrongdoing in this context.
Being charged with something is significant. Being investigated is not.
0 -
Mr. Quidder, perhaps.
Brawn had his own team and worked at Mercedes too, although I don't think he's fond of the Wolff.
I hope he's rather more sensible than Ecclestone. The sport's not nearing a precipice but it is driving in that direction. Sensible action would easily stop it getting near the edge.0 -
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."Chris said:
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?TonyE said:
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story
Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?0 -
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/0 -
Paul Nuttall's library
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukips-deputy-leader-paul-nuttall-55253780 -
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.Chris said:
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."Chris said:
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?TonyE said:
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story
Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?0 -
Trump us now 3.2% behind nationally on average with RCP, 4% behind in Colorado and 5. 2% behind in Pennsylvania so it is actually more likely Trump wins the popular vote then the Electoral College and if he does win the Electoral College it is now Colorado which will put him over the top, not Pennsylvania. Though a poll yesterday had him just 3 points behind in the Keystone stateJackW said:
Quite so .... One pillar of FOP is falling away for Trump ....Chris said:
That's quite significant information. Nate Silver rates Franklin and Marshall B+, but adjusts their results by reducing Clinton's lead by 2 points. This new poll was conducted about half after the FBI's intervention. The lead of 11 points is 2 points more than in their last poll, done from 28 Sep-2 Oct. According to 538, Clinton's national poll lead at that time was 2-3%.JackW said:Pennsylvania - Franklin & Marshall - Sample 863 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 49 .. Trump 38
http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/913809798323927231-f-m-poll-release-october-2016.pdf
But comparisons aside, on those figures, Pennsylvania would obviously still be out of reach for Trump.
Have I mentioned FOP before ? ....0 -
One could argue the same about Trump's Russian links, which would be equally silly.RobD said:
The FBI wouldn't be investigating if it were so trivial.Jobabob said:
But but - the husband of someone Hillary knew sent an email about something. Lock her up!Chris said:
Interestingly, a poll by Mitchell Research, conducted entirely after the FBI's intervention in the election, shows Clinton's lead is unchanged since last Tuesday, at 6 points:AndyJS said:
I think Trump may have to win either Michigan or Wisconsin to win the election.HYUFD said:
Even if he won NH alongside Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina and the rest of the Romney states Trump would only get to 269, he needs Pennsylvania or Colorado to get over 270, Colorado is closer in the RCP average than NH and Pennsylvania is also closer in recent polls.rottenborough said:NH Clinton +7 - Uni of NH.
That seems to block one of Trumpy's routes to ECV of 270
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/214738676-story0 -
Good news about Keith Vaz. Let private lives remain private - the gutter press visiting family tragedies on people for consensual sexual acts is not a trend any decent person ought to want to see continue.0
-
Yeah, brittle is a good description.Jonathan said:
Hannan is one of those chaps that presents a good front. He uses language well and makes his points aggressively.Theuniondivvie said:
That's certainly a more comprehensive analysis of Hannan's worldview than he ever manages. As has been pointed out, he has a tendency to block people when challenged, or reverts to a sickly sweet Anglosycophancy as a substitute for persuasion.viewcode said:
He contends that anglophone former British colonies constitute an ethnos (right word? would "nation" be better?) and have a superior understanding of civil rights to the rest of the world, resulting in a more peaceful administration without violent uprising since the Bill of Rights. To make this work he has to ignore Nordic countries that pioneered democracy before Britain (not to mention Greece and Rome), and maintain that the USA's impulse towards democracy is a product of British influence (as opposed to despite it), which ignores the influence of France in the independence. Not to mention the Irish War of Independence and the Highland Clearances.Theuniondivvie said:Perhaps Mr Hannan can release categorised lists of nationalities by level of foreignness, just so we can prepare for our bright, new, internationalist future.
So when when he says Canadians are "hardly foreign", he is being consistent with his mindset.
He does have inconsistencies and lacunae. He usually qualifies India (English as an official language, Commonwealth member) using phrases like "some people include", and always leaves out South Africa (English as an official language, Commonwealth member). I don't think he gets that Ireland exists (that "no revolutions since the Bill of Rights" thing does have an enormous exception that only makes sense if you realise he's ignoring Ireland) and Commonwealth former colonies like Jamaica rarely (never?) get mentioned
Who could have predicted Peruvian-born Hannan would be such a fan of the Anglosphere?
Yet for all that, there doesn't seem to be much depth. When he himself is challenged he is very brittle. Immediately post Brexit he almost went into meltdown.
I wonder which safe seat he is gunning for. Tick took.
It appears that suggesting that there's a spectrum of foreignness is a step too far even for dear, old Dan as he's deleted those tweets.0 -
Mr. Wheel, again, that reinforces that he should've prosecuted her.
The decision not to just looks like one rule for ordinary people, and another for the political elite.0 -
A perhaps more interesting, and less sensational article on Trump and Russia:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/trump-putin-alt-right-comintern/506015/0 -
Yes - the higher this sleazy man's profile the better it is for keeping Labour's polling at record lows.Jobabob said:Good news about Keith Vaz. Let private lives remain private - the gutter press visiting family tragedies on people for consensual sexual acts is not a trend any decent person ought to want to see continue.
0 -
Sometimes the metaphors just rush right up to you and batter you over the head.logical_song said:Paul Nuttall's library
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukips-deputy-leader-paul-nuttall-55253780 -
The court of public opinion is pretty damning when politician's genitalia are involved in secret shenanigans. I know that 'lewd' behaviour, bringing the company you work for into disrepute is sufficient reason for dismissal in a number of employers. How come our representatives are held to different, and lower standards?NickPalmer said:
That sentence is worth singling out, as it is relevant to politics again and again. If you accuse the Queen, or Theresa May, or Jeremy Corbyn, or anyone else of a hideous crime, the police have to investigate it - however, briefly. If they decide you were motivated by spite, the investigation may be rapid, or they may give it low priority, as happened to me when a far-right group mischievously accused me of inciting racial hatred of Arabs (I'd made a joke about the Taliban) - the police put it aside for over a year as they were too busy to get round to dismissing it.FF43 said:
Being investigated is no particular evidence of wrongdoing in this context.
Being charged with something is significant. Being investigated is not.0 -
This bet is effectively dependent on Clinton losing Florida.Casino_Royale said:
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
The viable bet map sees Clinton losing NC OH and IA taking her down to 279 with FL keeping her below or above 300.
As an aside it also shows how difficult Trump's path to 270 is.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/9eLwL0 -
Romney states + Iowa + Ohio+Nevada+Florida+Colorado now his best bet, that gets him to 274JackW said:
This bet is effectively dependent on Clinton losing Florida.Casino_Royale said:
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
The viable bet map sees Clinton losing NC OH and IA taking her down to 279 with FL keeping her below or above 300.
As an aside it also shows how difficult Trump's path to 270 is.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/9eLwL0 -
Terrible fire in Paul Nuttall's library.Theuniondivvie said:
Sometimes the metaphors just rush right up to you and batter you over the head.logical_song said:Paul Nuttall's library
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukips-deputy-leader-paul-nuttall-5525378
Both books destroyed - and one he hadn't finished colouring yet.0 -
That's a good point. There are several other aspects:Blue_rog said:
The court of public opinion is pretty damning when politician's genitalia are involved in secret shenanigans. I know that 'lewd' behaviour, bringing the company you work for into disrepute is sufficient reason for dismissal in a number of employers. How come our representatives are held to different, and lower standards?NickPalmer said:
That sentence is worth singling out, as it is relevant to politics again and again. If you accuse the Queen, or Theresa May, or Jeremy Corbyn, or anyone else of a hideous crime, the police have to investigate it - however, briefly. If they decide you were motivated by spite, the investigation may be rapid, or they may give it low priority, as happened to me when a far-right group mischievously accused me of inciting racial hatred of Arabs (I'd made a joke about the Taliban) - the police put it aside for over a year as they were too busy to get round to dismissing it.FF43 said:
Being investigated is no particular evidence of wrongdoing in this context.
Being charged with something is significant. Being investigated is not.
*) The opportunity for blackmail (overplayed to my mind)
*) Hypocrisy. For example, should a gay man, who is in the closet, be allowed to vote for anti-gay legislation?0 -
Because we allow it.Blue_rog said:
The court of public opinion is pretty damning when politician's genitalia are involved in secret shenanigans. I know that 'lewd' behaviour, bringing the company you work for into disrepute is sufficient reason for dismissal in a number of employers. How come our representatives are held to different, and lower standards?NickPalmer said:
That sentence is worth singling out, as it is relevant to politics again and again. If you accuse the Queen, or Theresa May, or Jeremy Corbyn, or anyone else of a hideous crime, the police have to investigate it - however, briefly. If they decide you were motivated by spite, the investigation may be rapid, or they may give it low priority, as happened to me when a far-right group mischievously accused me of inciting racial hatred of Arabs (I'd made a joke about the Taliban) - the police put it aside for over a year as they were too busy to get round to dismissing it.FF43 said:
Being investigated is no particular evidence of wrongdoing in this context.
Being charged with something is significant. Being investigated is not.
0 -
Putin's propaganda machine is live and well in the UK. From Russia Today, to the pro-Russian editorial line of the Independent and Evening Standard, to the forthcoming launch of Pravda in Scotland(!), and even some of the astro-turfers on here.Nigelb said:A perhaps more interesting, and less sensational article on Trump and Russia:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/trump-putin-alt-right-comintern/506015/
All dedicated to subverting the "Western Alliance".
Scary stuff.
0 -
Vote Liberal or we'll shoot your dogs, don't let the Tories strangle them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3892088/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-Former-Tory-deputy-premier-Michael-Heseltine-says-strangled-mother-s-pet-Alsatian-Kim.html0 -
Tories Slump to 16 Point Lead
The Tories have a 16-point lead - one point down from our last poll. Here are the figures.
Conservatives: 43% (no change from mid October)
Labour: 27% (up 1)
Ukip: 12% (up 1)
Lib Dems: 8% (no change)
Greens: 5% (down 1)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/nov/01/guardianicm-poll-gives-tories-16-point-lead-over-labour-politics-live?page=with:block-5818520be4b01c528432ee29#block-5818520be4b01c528432ee290 -
I see little prospect of Colorado putting Trump at 270+. 538 have Trump 4.1 points adrift with Clinton over 77% win ratio. Early voting also indicates a solid lead for her.HYUFD said:
Trump us now 3.2% behind nationally on average with RCP, 4% behind in Colorado and 5. 2% behind in Pennsylvania so it is actually more likely Trump wins the popular vote then the Electoral College and if he does win the Electoral College it is now Colorado which will put him over the top, not Pennsylvania. Though a poll yesterday had him just 3 points behind in the Keystone stateJackW said:
Quite so .... One pillar of FOP is falling away for Trump ....Chris said:
That's quite significant information. Nate Silver rates Franklin and Marshall B+, but adjusts their results by reducing Clinton's lead by 2 points. This new poll was conducted about half after the FBI's intervention. The lead of 11 points is 2 points more than in their last poll, done from 28 Sep-2 Oct. According to 538, Clinton's national poll lead at that time was 2-3%.JackW said:Pennsylvania - Franklin & Marshall - Sample 863 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 49 .. Trump 38
http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/913809798323927231-f-m-poll-release-october-2016.pdf
But comparisons aside, on those figures, Pennsylvania would obviously still be out of reach for Trump.
Have I mentioned FOP before ? ....
The latest PA poll issued this morning had Clinton +110 -
Still waiting for that Lib Dem breakthrough...CarlottaVance said:Tories Slump to 16 Point Lead
The Tories have a 16-point lead - one point down from our last poll. Here are the figures.
Conservatives: 43% (no change from mid October)
Labour: 27% (up 1)
Ukip: 12% (up 1)
Lib Dems: 8% (no change)
Greens: 5% (down 1)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/nov/01/guardianicm-poll-gives-tories-16-point-lead-over-labour-politics-live?page=with:block-5818520be4b01c528432ee29#block-5818520be4b01c528432ee290 -
A breach of the law would require either intent or gross negligence. Comey testified that there was insufficient evidence of intent, and said that in the circumstances no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case focused on gross negligence.brokenwheel said:
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.Chris said:
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."Chris said:
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?TonyE said:
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.
Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?
Of course he didn't testify that Clinton had broken the law. Read the transcript:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-odds-of-an-electoral-college-popular-vote-split-are-increasing/?ex_cid=2016-forecast0 -
Indeed.TGOHF said:
Yes - the higher this sleazy man's profile the better it is for keeping Labour's polling at record lows.Jobabob said:Good news about Keith Vaz. Let private lives remain private - the gutter press visiting family tragedies on people for consensual sexual acts is not a trend any decent person ought to want to see continue.
0 -
Trump was just 1% behind in Colorado yesterday, it is now more likely to win it for him than PA, half that PA poll was pre new emailgate revelationsJackW said:
I see little prospect of Colorado putting Trump at 270+. 538 have Trump 4.1 points adrift with Clinton over 77% win ratio. Early voting also indicates a solid lead for her.HYUFD said:
Trump us now 3.2% behind nationally on average with RCP, 4% behind in Colorado and 5. 2% behind in Pennsylvania so it is actually more likely Trump wins the popular vote then the Electoral College and if he does win the Electoral College it is now Colorado which will put him over the top, not Pennsylvania. Though a poll yesterday had him just 3 points behind in the Keystone stateJackW said:
Quite so .... One pillar of FOP is falling away for Trump ....Chris said:
That's quite significant information. Nate Silver rates Franklin and Marshall B+, but adjusts their results by reducing Clinton's lead by 2 points. This new poll was conducted about half after the FBI's intervention. The lead of 11 points is 2 points more than in their last poll, done from 28 Sep-2 Oct. According to 538, Clinton's national poll lead at that time was 2-3%.JackW said:Pennsylvania - Franklin & Marshall - Sample 863 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 49 .. Trump 38
http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/913809798323927231-f-m-poll-release-october-2016.pdf
But comparisons aside, on those figures, Pennsylvania would obviously still be out of reach for Trump.
Have I mentioned FOP before ? ....
The latest PA poll issued this morning had Clinton +110 -
-
I have taken some of the 240-269 band as well as a minor hedge against a Trump victory at 8/1.HYUFD said:
Romney states + Iowa + Ohio+Nevada+Florida+Colorado now his best bet, that gets him to 274JackW said:
This bet is effectively dependent on Clinton losing Florida.Casino_Royale said:
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
The viable bet map sees Clinton losing NC OH and IA taking her down to 279 with FL keeping her below or above 300.
As an aside it also shows how difficult Trump's path to 270 is.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/9eLwL
If he does win, he wins very narrowly.0 -
The progressive alliance or rainbow coalition is still behind.0
-
Theresa May still failing to hit the 52% David Cameron achieved in the polls.0
-
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.0
-
Manufacturing PMI - 54.3m in line with expectations. A decent figure overall. Output growth still solid and employment growth also still solid. Good start to the final quarter, if the services figures are good on Thursday then we should be looking at 0.4-0.6% growth which would mean up to 2.2% growth for the year.0
-
By pointing out a factual accuracy you will be labeled a Hilary sycophantChris said:
A breach of the law would require either intent or gross negligence. Comey testified that there was insufficient evidence of intent, and said that in the circumstances no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case focused on gross negligence.brokenwheel said:
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.Chris said:
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."Chris said:
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?TonyE said:
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.Jobabob said:
Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.
Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?
Of course he didn't testify that Clinton had broken the law. Read the transcript:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-odds-of-an-electoral-college-popular-vote-split-are-increasing/?ex_cid=2016-forecast0 -
I think Trump will carry OH and FL, but lose the election.peter_from_putney said:It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
0 -
See my earlier reply.HYUFD said:
Romney states + Iowa + Ohio+Nevada+Florida+Colorado now his best bet, that gets him to 274JackW said:
This bet is effectively dependent on Clinton losing Florida.Casino_Royale said:
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
The viable bet map sees Clinton losing NC OH and IA taking her down to 279 with FL keeping her below or above 300.
As an aside it also shows how difficult Trump's path to 270 is.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/9eLwL
The early numbers from Nevada are also putting the state away from Trump too. One by one Clinton is closing off Trump's limited routes to 270.0 -
New thread0
-
That the polls haven't decisively moved against Hillary after the FBI announcement perhaps just shows how low an opinion the voters already had of her....Jobabob said:
Lifelong GOP supporter (now voting for Hillary): "Clinton basically trotted out the socialist manifesto. But the released WikiLeaks transcripts of her paid speeches were very comforting to me."JackW said:Seth Stevenson of the "Slate" re-interviews a panel of 13 GOP voters, who had concerns about Trump becoming their nominee, to see who they will be voting for :
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/gop_voters_who_don_t_like_trump_reveal_their_votes.html
I believe the tired and traditional PB cliche for moments like this is "heart of stone not to laugh etc"..0 -
Osborne's golden legacy.MaxPB said:Manufacturing PMI - 54.3m in line with expectations. A decent figure overall. Output growth still solid and employment growth also still solid. Good start to the final quarter, if the services figures are good on Thursday then we should be looking at 0.4-0.6% growth which would mean up to 2.2% growth for the year.
0 -
LOL @ the Lib Dem surge.CarlottaVance said:Tories Slump to 16 Point Lead
The Tories have a 16-point lead - one point down from our last poll. Here are the figures.
Conservatives: 43% (no change from mid October)
Labour: 27% (up 1)
Ukip: 12% (up 1)
Lib Dems: 8% (no change)
Greens: 5% (down 1)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/nov/01/guardianicm-poll-gives-tories-16-point-lead-over-labour-politics-live?page=with:block-5818520be4b01c528432ee29#block-5818520be4b01c528432ee290 -
Yes, I have taken that bet (was able to get a tenner on with SkyBet – wow!). As you say, if she wins FL it's a bust.JackW said:
This bet is effectively dependent on Clinton losing Florida.Casino_Royale said:
The 6/1 with Skybet for 270-299 ECVs for the Democrats (hat tip to Peter from Putney yesterday) still looks a great bet.rottenborough said:Larry Sabato moves FL, OH, AZ, ME-2 into 'toss-up' from 'leans Dem'.
Clinton still gets 293.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
The viable bet map sees Clinton losing NC OH and IA taking her down to 279 with FL keeping her below or above 300.
As an aside it also shows how difficult Trump's path to 270 is.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/9eLwL0 -
I think I can feel a bet coming on!Jobabob said:
I think Trump will carry OH and FL, but lose the election.peter_from_putney said:It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
0 -
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!peter_from_putney said:It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
There has no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
0 -
You decide what's sleazy do you? Good to see the curtain-twitching tendency is alive and well on PB.TGOHF said:
Yes - the higher this sleazy man's profile the better it is for keeping Labour's polling at record lows.Jobabob said:Good news about Keith Vaz. Let private lives remain private - the gutter press visiting family tragedies on people for consensual sexual acts is not a trend any decent person ought to want to see continue.
0 -
Have already taken it Peter ;-)peter_from_putney said:
I think I can feel a bet coming on!Jobabob said:
I think Trump will carry OH and FL, but lose the election.peter_from_putney said:It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
0
