politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clinton versus Trump: What men say their spouses will do and w
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clinton versus Trump: What men say their spouses will do and what women in partnership actually say
Via @williamjordann Happy US families ahead of WH2016YouGov US: 33% of men say spouse supports Clinton compared with 45% who say they are pic.twitter.com/3XoNjKLW86
0
Comments
-
First like Farron....again!0
-
Second like, erm, a sixtieth of a minute.0
-
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.0 -
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/793385256820871168IanB2 said:First like Farron....again!
0 -
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
Sleazy blah, blah, slide, etc.TheScreamingEagles said:Tories nc
Labour +10 -
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
0 -
Those who care about reading my responses (to Peter, Jack etc) can find them on the old thread.0
-
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PBAnorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
Oh dear, Jill Stien appears to be totally ignored by both domestic partners…0
-
I had a fun evening of Hillary-ramping last night, and I can certainly see the appeal.Alistair said:
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-forecast
But this stuff about Comey is more downright absurd than factually inaccurate.Is it likely that the director of the FBI would testify to Congress that no prosecution should be brought against someone, but "declare" that they were guilty?0 -
Doesn't this work just as well the other way around?
Good morning, Miss JGP.0 -
Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
0 -
That's tempting fate.
Anyway,
FPT
I didn't say he testified that, he wouldn't say that because he claimed he could not prove intent. I said the things he admitted Clinton had done would be illegal if he could prove intent. Clinton rampers are trying to make out she did nothing wrong just because Comey wouldn't go for an indictment, but the reason not to go for an indictment has nothing to do with what she actually did.Chris 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-forecast
0 -
The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.0
-
The mugs wrong.AnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
Clinton was 'Madam Secretary of State' - she doesn't turn French by becoming President....
And good morning to you too!0 -
I'm reading this is "Mɑːdɑːrm" rather than "Mədəm" with the added "e", as in a woman who heads up a brothel rather than the polite address form.0
-
As a sharp bettor I guess he would have an interest in mugs!Anorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?0
-
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President0
-
So you support Mr Putin's puppy?MonikerDiCanio said:The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.
0 -
No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a voteAnorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.TheScreamingEagles said:
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PBAnorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?
0 -
Indeed, and married voters are much more likely to vote Republican, especially women. Trump's 7% lead is low by historic standards for a Republican candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:
No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a voteAnorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.Anorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
Nice of @JackW to pick one up for you there.MikeSmithson said:
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.TheScreamingEagles said:
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PBAnorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)0 -
The Clinton campaign are selling $6 buttons, which say “Madam President” – it sounds better.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
0 -
You didn't. You saidbrokenwheel said:That's tempting fate.
Anyway,
FPT
I said the things he admitted Clinton had done would be illegal if he could prove intent.Chris 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-forecast
"Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent."
The point is that the acts would not have broken the law in the absence of intent or gross negligence.
0 -
Um. Yes, got it now. *feels burning shame*not_on_fire said:
Indeed, and married voters are much more likely to vote Republican, especially women. Trump's 7% lead is low by historic standards for a Republican candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:
No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a voteAnorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...0 -
Does this mean thrice married pussy grabbers will tend to vote for Hillary?MonikerDiCanio said:
It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.Anorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
Interesting thought that being married (in USA) makes you more likely to be disappointed with your life and blame the Mexicans for your life being said disappointment.0
-
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.0 -
The nice men with baseball bats, caps and pickup trucks outside the polling stations.Anorak said:0 -
Mr. Fletcher, one of the charming ways Sir Edric describes his wife is 'the wicked witch of wedlock'.0
-
This discrepancy shows why cameras are normally banned from polling booths (to answer a Trump conspiracy theory from a few threads back).0
-
Rather good. Hope you are well this fine (cold, dark) morning.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Fletcher, one of the charming ways Sir Edric describes his wife is 'the wicked witch of wedlock'.
0 -
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame0 -
AnneJGP said:
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame0 -
According to that it would be Madam President, then. But I can't help but think that what Clinton (if elected) says will go.CarlottaVance said:AnneJGP said:
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame0 -
Mr. Fletcher, thanks. I'm quite well... trying to juggle writing with nagging/pestering/approaching in a subtle and prudent manner potential reviewers for Kingdom Asunder.
[Unlikely, but if any are lurking here, ARCs are available].
0 -
When I was in New Orleans and other Southern states I noted the regular use of 'Madame'AnneJGP said:
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
Less so in places like California, New York, Boston, and the rest of New England0 -
Do you own the infamous Labour immigration mug? I am gutted I never bought one when I had the chance.MikeSmithson said:
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.TheScreamingEagles said:
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PBAnorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
Elsewhere I assume it is too tainted by the association with prostitution.TheScreamingEagles said:
When I was in New Orleans and other Southern states I noted the regular use of 'Madame'AnneJGP said:
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
Less so in places like California, New York, Boston, and the rest of New England0 -
I don't get whats the big deal with that Labour mug, I agree with it?MP_SE said:
Do you own the infamous Labour immigration mug? I am gutted I never bought one when I had the chance.MikeSmithson said:
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.TheScreamingEagles said:
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PBAnorak said:Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.
EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?0 -
She's selling buttons saying 'Madam'.....I suspect 'Madame' might sound pretentious to some ears.....TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to that it would be Madam President, then. But I can't help but think that what Clinton (if elected) says will go.CarlottaVance said:AnneJGP said:
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?TheScreamingEagles said:
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by languageAnneJGP said:Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?
Good morning, everyone.
It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame0 -
You really are a nasty piece of work.MonikerDiCanio said:
It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.Anorak said:That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
0 -
I think the extra "e" on Madame is so that nobody thinks the FBI have accused her of running a brothel too.....0
-
MarqueeMark said:
I think the extra "e" on Madame is so that nobody thinks the FBI have accused her of running a brothel too.....
0 -
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
Well when he doesn't pay a dishwasher what do you expect.........Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
Well quite.nunu said:
Well when he doesn't pay a dishwasher what do you expect.........Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
Tim Bernard Lee on R4 this morning re internet security and investigatory powers: "Governments always trust themselves just a little bit more than we should trust them."
The man truly is a national treasure.0 -
George Ford's England career will be over if he joins Toulon. Can we have a whip round for the flight?0
-
https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.0 -
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
***** Betting Post *****
Anyone fancy a safety first combination bet, hopefully to return a 64% profit in 8 days time?
Back the Democrats to win:
330 - 359 ECVs staking 38.74% at 4.40 (4.23 net) with BetfairEx
300 - 329 ECVs staking 37.85% at 4.33 with SkyBet
270 - 299 ECVs staking 23.41% at 7.0 with SyBet
Do your own research.0 -
The only person with proven links to Russia is Mr Podesta who made a nice packet out of Uranium sales to Russia. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/20/wikileaks-bombshell-john-podestas-daughter-received-75000-shares-putin-connected-energy-company/MikeSmithson said:
So you support Mr Putin's puppy?MonikerDiCanio said:The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.
0 -
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
It's the independents that are important - I do note that the LA Poll Tracker now has Trump +3.6 - even the change in the vote of the single AA won't account for that.SimonStClare said:https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.0 -
When your tanks take the form of TV ads it's quite hard to do a surprise attack without the other side noticing.TheWhiteRabbit said:
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
Nate Silver looked at this a couple of days ago, and suggested a scenario in which Trump could just reach 270 by winning Wisconsin and Michigan, even without North Carolina and Nevada:JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-what-if-clinton-wins-north-carolina-and-loses-pennsylvania/?ex_cid=2016-forecast0 -
Is the "e" on the end of "Madam" meant to remind the first gentleman (someone FGOTUS?) that he doesn't have to call Monica if he wants French?0
-
The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :
Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60
http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard0 -
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.
0 -
And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...TheWhiteRabbit said:
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
It is interesting that the massive poll leads for the Cons have become almost unremarkable. I was looking at UK electoral maps since 1997 and the change has been dramatic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1997#/media/File:UK_General_Election,_1997.svg
In 1997, Labour had a massive block of seats stretching all the way across the country from Conwy to Cleethorpes and down to Corby. Another block stretched from Fishguard to Stroud. there was also a big Thames Estuary cluster and another around Northampton and Milton Keynes. Of course Scotland was still strongly Lab and there were some surprise seats like NW Norfolk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005#/media/File:2005UKElectionMap.svg
By 2005 the Northants block has mostly disappeared and Lab has lost ground in the Thames Estuary. Most of the surprise seats like NW Norfolk and Inverness have gone but Lab still looks very strong in the Northern block
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015#/media/File:2015UKElectionMap.svg
By 2015, the biggest change is the disappearance of all but one seat in Scotland. The Tories have broken up the big Northern block by gaining Calder and Colne Valleys. The Thames Estuary cluster has disappeared and Lab are reduced to a few red spots in Southern England outside London.
On current polling and current boundaries Lab could be wiped out in N Wales (losing 4 to Con and 1 to Plaid) and lose 2 each in Coventry and the Potteries. With a small further swing the Cons could become the largest party in Wales and the largest party in the former West Midlands county. The only good news for Lab is that Merseyside, Greater Manchester and S Yorkshire still look rock solid, while Lab would still be largest party in London.0 -
Again in theory yes but it ain't happening.Chris said:
Nate Silver looked at this a couple of days ago, and suggested a scenario in which Trump could just reach 270 by winning Wisconsin and Michigan, even without North Carolina and Nevada:JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-what-if-clinton-wins-north-carolina-and-loses-pennsylvania/?ex_cid=2016-forecast0 -
Doesn't tell us much that we don't already know.JackW said:The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :
Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60
http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard
i.e. Trump won't win unless he picks off the toss-ups and at least two (probably 3) of the lean D states.0 -
Indeed.DavidL said:
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.
Colorado and Nevada are being closed down. Clinton's early scores are encouraging. She's swinging through there in the next few days and has a visit to Arizona being planned too.0 -
TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
True enough, but it certainly highlights the attraction of the "safety first" bet I suggested on this thread.weejonnie said:
Doesn't tell us much that we don't already know.JackW said:The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :
Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60
http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard
0 -
*Checks betting slip*JackW said:The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :
Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60
http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard0 -
They won the campaign. They lost the rematch four years later.JackW said:
And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...TheWhiteRabbit said:
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..0 -
National Tracker - IBD/TIPP - Sample 1,018 - 26-31 Oct
Clinton 45 .. Trump 44
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/0 -
That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.DavidL said:It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.
He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.0 -
Clinton beats Trump in 2020 ...david_herdson said:
They won the campaign. They lost the rematch four years later.JackW said:
And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...TheWhiteRabbit said:
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.JackW said:
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?FF43 said:
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.JackW said:
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 is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP .. 0 -
Bill Mitchell
IBD ridiculous reweight: Party identification breakdown:(Unweighted) 323 Democrats/354 Republicans/327 Independents; (Weighted) 400/329/2730 -
You can't tell if that's appropriate just from the figures.PlatoSaid said:Bill Mitchell
IBD ridiculous reweight: Party identification breakdown:(Unweighted) 323 Democrats/354 Republicans/327 Independents; (Weighted) 400/329/273
Shouldn't be difficult to get the national numbers of party ID?0 -
-
Oh so tragic for those desperate to make a Trump Russia link
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?_r=00 -
I think that's more a treatise on what you hope against hope will happen, rather than what is actually likely to happen.Dromedary said:
That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.DavidL said:It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.
He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.0 -
Since Clinton has a proven record for embroiling the USA in wars I think this is hypocritical of her - but she's a Democrat so that's not unexpected.619 said:0 -
weejonnie said:
It's the independents that are important - I do note that the LA Poll Tracker now has Trump +3.6 - even the change in the vote of the single AA won't account for that.SimonStClare said:https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.
Yes, that's the highest Trump score since, um, 3 October. It really is shit or bust for the LA Times tracker...0 -
Umm
Ben
Micheal Heseltine choked his Mum's dog to death.
https://t.co/iesOmerMQA https://t.co/yK5muUmuWw0 -
'Madam' is what this website, which appears to be an authority on these things, goes with:Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.
http://www.formsofaddress.info/FOA_president_US.html0 -
National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,128 - 26-30 Oct
Clinton 45 .. Trump 46
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-leads-clinton-point-poll-enthusiasm-declines/story?id=431994590 -
Yep, it's a complete slur to suggest that Trump isn't just as likely to bilk a service provider who had done a good job for him.edmundintokyo said:
TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
The preferred explanation is that he's a deadbeat billionaire.edmundintokyo said:
TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.Jobabob said:
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.CarlottaVance said:
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...TheWhiteRabbit said:
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.CarlottaVance said:
No. 'Madam'.not_on_fire said:Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
Right...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.0 -
Morning all. Random US question, does anyone know of any markets that are actually for the name of the next president, i.e. to be settled on Inauguration Day rather than just after the election?
I have a feeling that a lot might happen between November and January, and the next president isn't who we think it will be.0 -
"According to exit polls, 53 percent of voters in the 2012 elections were women"
https://voterunlead.org/go-vote/womens-vote/0 -
No - I want Clinton to win! But I think the momentum is with Trump and that the Clinton side's responses to the Comey story have been punily weak.Jobabob said:
I think that's more a treatise on what you hope against hope will happen, rather than what is actually likely to happen.Dromedary said:
That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.DavidL said:It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.
He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.0
This discussion has been closed.