politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Clinton does win the popular vote then it’ll make the polli
Comments
-
If the driving focus of anger is economic policy then yes, it's possible. If it's cultural factors then absolutely not.Jonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.0 -
Bored now. Can we just wrap this up now please.0
-
Pong said:
Argh.Mortimer said:After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
What you needed to do was not back Clinton @ 1.15 at 1am - and then not cashout your painful Florida spread. Also, you should have remembered to flip the bets on Trump taking MI & PA.
Hope that helps.
Actually not flipping the bets (and lumping on Trump when it became a little obvious, c.2.30) saved me from just scraping even.....0 -
SouthamObserver said:
Spot on - May always puts her career, and therefore her party, above the needs of the country.kle4 said:
May's goal in Brexit is to ensure whatever she gets is enough for her party to be happy with, so that they are united come any fight with Labour.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Well, the two could well align, and I hope they do, but in general given that May was officially of the position Remain was better than any conceivable form of Brexit, it is not exactly controversial to suggest that while she will go for the best deal she think she can get, from the EU and in the view of those whose support she needs the most, Her private view of what is best hardly matters, since her private view was Remain was best, and that's off the table.SouthamObserver said:
Spot on - May always puts her career, and therefore her party, above the needs of the country.kle4 said:
May's goal in Brexit is to ensure whatever she gets is enough for her party to be happy with, so that they are united come any fight with Labour.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit0 -
Thanks Mr Borough - sorry to hear about your woes.rottenborough said:
up is up. There's another day.Mortimer said:After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.0 -
Margaret Beckett on fire on R5.-1
-
Except the EU will have no confidence in us having the political will to actually defend the Baltics and E Europeans from Russia if a hot war breaks out given the way the UK public has voted to leave the EU.Big_G_NorthWales said:
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining toolJonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
0 -
What I needed to do was type in a bigger number into the lay box when Hills was 1.13Pong said:
Argh.Mortimer said:After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
What you needed to do was not back Clinton @ 1.15 at 1am - and then not cashout your painful Florida spread. Also, you should have remembered to flip the bets on Trump taking MI & PA.
Hope that helps.
I was however massively exposed to Trump at that point, so at least I DID the deed !0 -
You want to go direct to nuclear the armageddon part?Casino_Royale said:Bored now. Can we just wrap this up now please.
0 -
Chin up - things are rarely as bad (or good) in practice as we fear(hope) they will be.Me_ said:I'm in total despair.
I thought only we (brazilians) were capable of electing such idiots to government.
It seems, I was wrong. I feel depressed. We had the worst local elections ever, an impeached president, and now this...0 -
No, USA Ambassdaor to the EU or to Germany or to Belgium...David_Evershed said:Farage should be first in the queue to be appointed UK ambassador to the USA.
0 -
It is entirely credible that we might this morning have been looking at President SandersJonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.0 -
Trump gores Clinton.
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/uspresidents/f/pres_unpopular.htm0 -
Please withdraw those uncalled for accussation in your last paragraph.Stark_Dawning said:
Sorry, but I'm irritated by this endless talk or 'WCC' and 'little people' blah, blah, blah. It's increasingly becoming the ideal cloak with which the unscrupulous can hide their divisive, intolerant and quasi-fascist leanings.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit0 -
Well I am ditching a whole batch of shares; I cannot believe the markets are going to stay up at these levels over the coming weeks0
-
Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?JonathanD said:Except the EU will have no confidence in us having the political will to actually defend the Baltics and E Europeans from Russia if a hot war breaks out given the way the UK public has vo ted to leave the EU.
0 -
Would you rather a thread about the Alternative Voting System?Casino_Royale said:Bored now. Can we just wrap this up now please.
0 -
Or he is missing the daily discussion of soft and hard Brexit?edmundintokyo said:
You want to go direct to nuclear the armageddon part?Casino_Royale said:Bored now. Can we just wrap this up now please.
0 -
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.0 -
Bernie Sanders is a patriotic American, just like Clinton and Trump. Corbyn is not a patriotic Briton.IanB2 said:
It is entirely credible that we might this morning have been looking at President SandersJonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
0 -
I'm very glad that the ARM sale went through *before* this. Not that I wanted it to be sold, but it it had to be sold then at least I made a nice sum out of it.IanB2 said:Well I am ditching a whole batch of shares; I cannot believe the markets are going to stay up at these levels over the coming weeks
0 -
The thing about Hillary is that she stood by the appalling behaviour of Bill against all those women. No sisterly support there if she was a feminist.JosiasJessop said:This is a major setback for feminism.
......
0 -
Before people will listen to your economic case they have to believe that you share their core values. That is Corbyn's problem. He quite clearly has very little in common on a cultural level with most voters in this country.david_herdson said:
If the driving focus of anger is economic policy then yes, it's possible. If it's cultural factors then absolutely not.Jonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
0 -
I'd guess overspeed, probably the tram couldn't brake enough because of the conditions (torrential rain in London this morning).JosiasJessop said:
Thanks - I'm not familiar with Tramlink. As well as working out what happened (split points or overspeed?), RAIB will be looking very carefully at how the fatalities happened and what can be done to prevent them in future.RochdalePioneers said:
Looks like its at the junction where the lines to new Addington and Beckenham diverge. Runs down a ramp into a cutting where the old Addiscombe branch used to run, with sharp 90 degree turns onto the old formation. Looks like the Tram has come off the track on the points at the junction.JosiasJessop said:
It looks fairly awful. One carriage looks as though it's partially on the rails; the other is on its side, either before or after a sharp bend / junction.dr_spyn said:
RAIB's going to be busy.
From memory, this is the first such crash on a 'modern' tram system. There have been plenty of collisions with pedestrians and cars, but this may well be the first self-inflicted tram crash of this sort.0 -
Of course they should but if the EU ups its defence budget we will then have no negotiating leverage with the EU and we will be out of favour with both the EU and an isolationist USA.glw said:
Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?JonathanD said:Except the EU will have no confidence in us having the political will to actually defend the Baltics and E Europeans from Russia if a hot war breaks out given the way the UK public has vo ted to leave the EU.
0 -
Nope. Just want my money out of Betfair, and to get on with my life.David_Evershed said:
Would you rather a thread about the Alternative Voting System?Casino_Royale said:Bored now. Can we just wrap this up now please.
0 -
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)0 -
Absolutely he has a point. Europe can afford to fund its own defence.HurstLlama said:
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.0 -
Our capabilities may be pitiful (I don't agree IMO, but you come from a knowledgeable position), but so are those of the people we might have to fight.HurstLlama said:
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.
The real game changer is asymmetrical warfare. The only way to beat that is to do what the Russians have done in Chechnya and are doing in Syria.
I'm unsure that's a model we wish to follow.0 -
Presently Clinton has taken a 0.1% ppopular vote lead when final polls had her ahead by 3. 2% on average so I really don't think pollsters can take much comfort there especially given their generally abysmal state polling with a few honourable exceptions. In terms of the popular vote it should also be remembered that the third place candidate at the moment is Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate and a former Republican governor who will undoubtedly have taken some Republican votes which would otherwise have gone to Trump. With Stein, the Green candidate in fourth it is thus a different scenario from 2000 when it was Nader, the Green candidate, who was third0
-
It's both.david_herdson said:
If the driving focus of anger is economic policy then yes, it's possible. If it's cultural factors then absolutely not.Jonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
People assume that opposition to globalisation is an issue of the former, not the latter.
In fact, it's stagnation of wages *and* continuing high-levels of immigration/cultural change that have mixed together to make this brew.0 -
It has two colleges and is something of an exurb of Boston ...david_herdson said:
That looks to depend pretty much entirely on Keene, which sounds like the high-percentage-white, post-manufacturing town where Trump has done very well. I'd be cautious.dogbasket said:Democrats have won New Hampshire, why is it still evens on Betfair, do people even math??? Trump ahead by 307. But, from 2012:
Tamworth 718/843 (Obama +125)
Easton 63/122 (Obama +59)
Surry 219/270 (Obama +51)
Nottingham 1379/1364 (Obama -15)
Washington 314/285 (Obama -29)
Middleton 439/416 (Obama -23)
Litchfield 2703/1956 (Obama -747)
Sutton 545/654 (Obama +109)
Orford 239/455 (Obama +216)
Woodstock 307/456 (Obama +149)
Loudon 1546/1414 (Obama -132)
Newton 1395/1104 (Obama -291)
Stratford 105/167 (Obama + 62)
Milford 3787/3954 (Obama +167)
Keene 3613/8718 (Obama +5105)
New Castle 419/396 (Obama - 23)
That's net +4410 for Obama, or 44.5% to 55.5%. Trump needs over 49.6% of the vote in the remaining towns to win, a swing of 5.1% relative to 2012.
The biparty vote share in 2012 was 47.2% to 52.8%, and Trump is now 47.5% to 47.4%, so his swing so far is only 2.8%.
It's not impossible for Trump to win New Hampshire, but the odds are not good.0 -
"That looks to depend pretty much entirely on Keene, which sounds like the high-percentage-white, post-manufacturing town where Trump has done very well. I'd be cautious."
Keene is close to Massachusetts and Vermont and it appears to be full of students.
The swing isn't impossible, but it's maybe a 1 in 5 chance.0 -
Well, I've no reason to believe it applies to you personally - I'm happy to clarify that. But are elements using supposed working-class grievances to advance a dark agenda? Absolutely!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Please withdraw those uncalled for accussation in your last paragraph.Stark_Dawning said:
Sorry, but I'm irritated by this endless talk or 'WCC' and 'little people' blah, blah, blah. It's increasingly becoming the ideal cloak with which the unscrupulous can hide their divisive, intolerant and quasi-fascist leanings.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit0 -
The rest of Europe may not but we do. If I was in a former Soviet Republic faced with a Revanchist Russia that's already invaded one neighbour and now has a friend of Putin in the White house ... I'd be wanting every military ally I could get of which we are one worth having.HurstLlama said:
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.0 -
snap
snap!dogbasket said:"That looks to depend pretty much entirely on Keene, which sounds like the high-percentage-white, post-manufacturing town where Trump has done very well. I'd be cautious."
Keene is close to Massachusetts and Vermont and it appears to be full of students.
The swing isn't impossible, but it's maybe a 1 in 5 chance.0 -
In Rio we elected a evangelical pastor, whose church is accused of stealing faithful's money. He hates gays, the catholic churc, etc etc. So you do imagine that I thought: ok, this is it, nothing can be worse than this.kle4 said:
Chin up - things are rarely as bad (or good) in practice as we fear(hope) they will be.Me_ said:I'm in total despair.
I thought only we (brazilians) were capable of electing such idiots to government.
It seems, I was wrong. I feel depressed. We had the worst local elections ever, an impeached president, and now this...0 -
The idea that Corbyn can take any comfort from the polling failures of the past year is risible given that in each case the left (or in the case of Brexit the side supported by most of the left) has underperformed.rottenborough said:
Yes, but the argument was these big rally crowds meant nothing. They were weird people. Real people are at home getting ready to vote Clinton. Maybe Corbyn is right about his rallies?MonikerDiCanio said:
My God, a politician responding to what people like. Whatever next ?edmundintokyo said:
Trump pioneered a much faster cycle than traditional focus groups where he'd say random things and if the crowd seemed to like them he'd ad-lib the rest of the program around them.Alistair said:
Trump claimed Hillary was a criminalist and a sexual abuser enablerist. It's not like he wasn't engaged in negative campaigning.FrancisUrquhart said:Where does this leave billion dollar ad spends, 24/7 media attacks on one candidate and campaigns based around claiming your opppnent is every -ist under the sun.
Not the big loser is the (pseudo?) science of microtargetting - the thing that supposedly won the Tories and Obama their last respective elections. Might it just have been that they had the better candidate?0 -
Popular polling huh?
Dismissed by Remainers but apparently for Brexit As if by magic..... Acceptable in us election
Jesus H fucking Christ0 -
Whilst I prefer NATO I'm not completely anti-EU providing they actually are going to put some money behind it.Richard_Nabavi said:You mean - establish an EU Army?
(runs for cover)
0 -
Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
An armed forces needs to believe in what they are defending to be effective. That works well for the nation state recruiting citizen volunteers. Machiavelli doubted it would work when the State relied on mercenaries. I doubt it will work when established by a supranational entity that only a plurality of 'citizens' identify with.
Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland clearly need to step up to the plate.0 -
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)0 -
Yes, Trump.tlg86 said:Has anyone else hit the wall?
He went through it.0 -
The Telegraph has a better (if that's the term) picture:ThreeQuidder said:
I'd guess overspeed, probably the tram couldn't brake enough because of the conditions (torrential rain in London this morning).JosiasJessop said:
Thanks - I'm not familiar with Tramlink. As well as working out what happened (split points or overspeed?), RAIB will be looking very carefully at how the fatalities happened and what can be done to prevent them in future.RochdalePioneers said:
Looks like its at the junction where the lines to new Addington and Beckenham diverge. Runs down a ramp into a cutting where the old Addiscombe branch used to run, with sharp 90 degree turns onto the old formation. Looks like the Tram has come off the track on the points at the junction.JosiasJessop said:
It looks fairly awful. One carriage looks as though it's partially on the rails; the other is on its side, either before or after a sharp bend / junction.dr_spyn said:
RAIB's going to be busy.
From memory, this is the first such crash on a 'modern' tram system. There have been plenty of collisions with pedestrians and cars, but this may well be the first self-inflicted tram crash of this sort.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/09/croydon-tram-derailment-five-trapped-and-40-people-injured/
Both cars on their side past the points. Which suggests the piccies of a tram car on the rails near a station might be uninvolved: perhaps in use to get rescuers to the site and injured passengers away?
Some reports say six dead.0 -
Trump will probably not be able to cease NATO but I bet the US is wanting to reduce its share of the cost. Which will put the defence ball firmly back with the EU countries.glw said:
Whilst I prefer NATO I'm not completely anti-EU providing they actually are going to put some money behind it.Richard_Nabavi said:You mean - establish an EU Army?
(runs for cover)0 -
What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
I have said here before that I have no objection to a European form of NATO, or a more heavily beefed up European contribution to NATO.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
Over my dead body will I cooperate and put those forces under the auspices of the EU, Juncker, the High Rep, and Tusk.
Why?
One is a mutual defence alliance between sovereign nations, the latter is giving a political union more trappings of statehood, together with some muscle and teeth.0 -
Interesting that Germany would have to almost double its spending. May be they need some easy payments plan spreading it over a few years.....?Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/08/news/nato-summit-spending-countries/0 -
OK - fair enough. I only had a cursory internet check.MTimT said:
It has two colleges and is something of an exurb of Boston ...david_herdson said:
That looks to depend pretty much entirely on Keene, which sounds like the high-percentage-white, post-manufacturing town where Trump has done very well. I'd be cautious.dogbasket said:Democrats have won New Hampshire, why is it still evens on Betfair, do people even math??? Trump ahead by 307. But, from 2012:
Tamworth 718/843 (Obama +125)
Easton 63/122 (Obama +59)
Surry 219/270 (Obama +51)
Nottingham 1379/1364 (Obama -15)
Washington 314/285 (Obama -29)
Middleton 439/416 (Obama -23)
Litchfield 2703/1956 (Obama -747)
Sutton 545/654 (Obama +109)
Orford 239/455 (Obama +216)
Woodstock 307/456 (Obama +149)
Loudon 1546/1414 (Obama -132)
Newton 1395/1104 (Obama -291)
Stratford 105/167 (Obama + 62)
Milford 3787/3954 (Obama +167)
Keene 3613/8718 (Obama +5105)
New Castle 419/396 (Obama - 23)
That's net +4410 for Obama, or 44.5% to 55.5%. Trump needs over 49.6% of the vote in the remaining towns to win, a swing of 5.1% relative to 2012.
The biparty vote share in 2012 was 47.2% to 52.8%, and Trump is now 47.5% to 47.4%, so his swing so far is only 2.8%.
It's not impossible for Trump to win New Hampshire, but the odds are not good.0 -
I doubt Corbyn would even describe himself as British. He'd probably find that unpalatable.SouthamObserver said:
Bernie Sanders is a patriotic American, just like Clinton and Trump. Corbyn is not a patriotic Briton.IanB2 said:
It is entirely credible that we might this morning have been looking at President SandersJonathan said:
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.SouthamObserver said:
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.Jonathan said:
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.SouthamObserver said:
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.Jonathan said:
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.SouthamObserver said:
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.Stark_Dawning said:I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.0 -
The difference is lots of polling for Brexit pointed to a Leave vote, it just wasn't taken seriously. Other than the LA Times I can't think of much polling that pointed to a Trump win - especially on a key States basis.Moses_ said:Popular polling huh?
Dismissed by Remainers but apparently for Brexit As if by magic..... Acceptable in us election
Jesus H fucking Christ0 -
I thought he was building it.Andy_Cooke said:0 -
The UK only makes the 2% by an accounting trick. Spending on matters like pensions and intelligence agencies which have traditionally not been regarded as defence expenditure were declared as such by Osborne and lo we made the 2%, just.Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)0 -
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
Alleged behaviour in both Trump and Bill's case.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The thing about Hillary is that she stood by the appalling behaviour of Bill against all those women. No sisterly support there if she was a feminist.JosiasJessop said:This is a major setback for feminism.
......
But in Trump's case, the language he has himself used give some credence to the complaints against him.
But like information security, this election is not going to lead to better behaviour towards women (and men in some cases as well).0 -
Trump got the hopey changey vibe.
p.s. magic number0 -
So why is Merkel being so hostile to Trump? Just plain stupid.Philip_Thompson said:
The rest of Europe may not but we do. If I was in a former Soviet Republic faced with a Revanchist Russia that's already invaded one neighbour and now has a friend of Putin in the White house ... I'd be wanting every military ally I could get of which we are one worth having.HurstLlama said:
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.
0 -
No he's going to make the Mexicans build it.rottenborough said:
I thought he was building it.Andy_Cooke said:0 -
Yeah right okPhilip_Thompson said:
The difference is lots of polling for Brexit pointed to a Leave vote, it just wasn't taken seriously. Other than the LA Times I can't think of much polling that pointed to a Trump win - especially on a key States basis.Moses_ said:Popular polling huh?
Dismissed by Remainers but apparently for Brexit As if by magic..... Acceptable in us election
Jesus H fucking Christ
Where's that twat 969 or IOS or whatever?
A troll obviously0 -
I'm expecting a more fundamental realignment than that.IanB2 said:
Trump will probably not be able to cease NATO but I bet the US is wanting to reduce its share of the cost. Which will put the defence ball firmly back with the EU countries.glw said:
Whilst I prefer NATO I'm not completely anti-EU providing they actually are going to put some money behind it.Richard_Nabavi said:You mean - establish an EU Army?
(runs for cover)
http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-meier20-2008aug20-story.html
In March 2000, in his first interview with a foreign reporter -- the BBC's David Frost -- Putin shocked critics and fans alike, saying, "We believe we can talk about more profound integration with NATO, but only if Russia is regarded as an equal partner." Asked outright if Russia could join NATO, Putin shot back: "I do not see why not." He also added a dark warning: Any NATO attempt to exclude Russia from the debate over the alliance's eastward expansion would only provoke "opposition."0 -
Possibly right about better attitudes towards females not going to happen, although it would be nice for PB to show the way!JosiasJessop said:
Alleged behaviour in both Trump and Bill's case.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The thing about Hillary is that she stood by the appalling behaviour of Bill against all those women. No sisterly support there if she was a feminist.JosiasJessop said:This is a major setback for feminism.
......
But in Trump's case, the language he has himself used give some credence to the complaints against him.
But like information security, this election is not going to lead to better behaviour towards women (and men in some cases as well).
On the allegations, yes you can term it that but the stuff is piled up on the record. For example coercing a BJ out of an intern!
0 -
It's got jack-all to do with an EU army, although it's a convenient straw-man for the federalists to create one (who then won't follow through with the proper funding)Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
This is about EU nations pumping up their defence spending to 2% of GDP, and taking their responsibilities seriously.
This isn't hard. France/Italy/Spain/Germany/Poland all chipping in as well as the UK could field a very sophisticated and competent battlegroup, consisting of 5-6 corps, alongside the US, and have a standing 150-200k soldiers in the field, and doubling it in case of an emergency.
That would deter Russia.0 -
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
RCP called FL, NC, GA, OH, AZ, IA, CO and VA right, but got NH and NV wrong (for Trump) and PA and WI wrong (for Hillary). Given how close NH is, and how NV, MI, WI and PA all are going whatever way they go because of completely different electorates than in the past, I would say RCP did ok by Trump.Philip_Thompson said:
The difference is lots of polling for Brexit pointed to a Leave vote, it just wasn't taken seriously. Other than the LA Times I can't think of much polling that pointed to a Trump win - especially on a key States basis.Moses_ said:Popular polling huh?
Dismissed by Remainers but apparently for Brexit As if by magic..... Acceptable in us election
Jesus H fucking Christ0 -
All of which is perfectly compliant with NATO accounting rules, and makes our expenditure more comparable with our allies- who are doing exactly the same supposed 'accounting tricks', but are not reaching the target.HurstLlama said:
The UK only makes the 2% by an accounting trick. Spending on matters like pensions and intelligence agencies which have traditionally not be regarded as defence expenditure were declared as such by Osborne and lo we made the 2%, just.Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
Back to BAORsics?Casino_Royale said:This isn't hard. France/Italy/Spain/Germany/Poland all chipping in as well as the UK could field a very sophisticated and competent battlegroup, consisting of 5-6 corps, alongside the US, and have a standing 150-200k soldiers in the field, and doubling it in case of an emergency.
That would deter Russia.0 -
While the electoral college system is constitutional, it's up to the states how to apportion their electors (hence Nebraska and Maine doing it differently to the rest).SimonStClare said:
Thanks for the reply Mr vik – I suspected as much.vik said:
It's set in aspic by Article II of the Constitution.SimonStClare said:
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?Casino_Royale said:
The popular votePulpstar said:Clinton WINS
To change it, you'd need a majority of 2/3rd in both the House & the Senate, and then ratification by 3/4ths of all States.
So what if some states make a deal that, once enough states have signed up to dominate the electoral college, they will send electors to ensure the national popular vote is upheld, rather than based on their own in-state results?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
I do wonder if there'll be some more momentum for this now.0 -
I'm not convinced Bernie would have beaten Trump now because it was not just about trade it was about immigration as well and you can't Trump the Donald on that issue.
I feel scared for the world now, recession within the year now I think.0 -
The Guardian's website is fun today.
It reminds me of the Don McLean song ...
"They would not listen, they're not listening still.
Perhaps they never will."
No doubt a legal challenge is on the way. At least it will keep them off street corners or Islington dinner parties.
Trump will tone down the rhetoric. He never had any intention of building a Mexican wall. If the thick white men in America understand that, why don't the media "elite"?0 -
Weren't we all told how wonderful Osborne is?HurstLlama said:
The UK only makes the 2% by an accounting trick. Spending on matters like pensions and intelligence agencies which have traditionally not been regarded as defence expenditure were declared as such by Osborne and lo we made the 2%, just.Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)0 -
If I heard him right he promised roads, bridges, schools, and some other things I can't remember as well. And not just ordinary roads and bridges but great, wonderful ones.rottenborough said:
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
Merkel has been in office so long she is blind to it.TCPoliticalBetting said:
So why is Merkel being so hostile to Trump? Just plain stupid.Philip_Thompson said:
The rest of Europe may not but we do. If I was in a former Soviet Republic faced with a Revanchist Russia that's already invaded one neighbour and now has a friend of Putin in the White house ... I'd be wanting every military ally I could get of which we are one worth having.HurstLlama said:
The UK's defence capabilities are pitiful. They may be better than most EU nations, but that really isn't saying much. Europe has essentially disarmed and does not have the political will to fight in any case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.JonathanD said:
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
From what I understand Trump's beef with NATO is that the USA pays for about 75% of it and nearly all European partners do not even pretend to spend the 2% of GDP on defence that they agreed to do. I think he has a point.
Her politics are still anchored in the mid-naughties.0 -
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/04/obamas-dont-do-stupid-shit-foreign-policy/rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
I would argue our military is still underfunded. Navy needs additional frigates and crew. Subs are about right. We should really have 2 x extra destroyers.HurstLlama said:
The UK only makes the 2% by an accounting trick. Spending on matters like pensions and intelligence agencies which have traditionally not been regarded as defence expenditure were declared as such by Osborne and lo we made the 2%, just.Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
RAF just about ok, but could use a couple of extra squadrons of eurofighters.
The army is now just a national militia.0 -
So I think I'm right in saying that the Democrat has got the most votes in 6 out of the last 7 presidential elections?0
-
In fact, based on RCP, the only true shock is that the Rust Belt strategy worked.MTimT said:
RCP called FL, NC, GA, OH, AZ, IA, CO and VA right, but got NH and NV wrong (for Trump) and PA and WI wrong (for Hillary). Given how close NH is, and how NV, MI, WI and PA all are going whatever way they go because of completely different electorates than in the past, I would say RCP did ok by Trump.Philip_Thompson said:
The difference is lots of polling for Brexit pointed to a Leave vote, it just wasn't taken seriously. Other than the LA Times I can't think of much polling that pointed to a Trump win - especially on a key States basis.Moses_ said:Popular polling huh?
Dismissed by Remainers but apparently for Brexit As if by magic..... Acceptable in us election
Jesus H fucking Christ0 -
100% of the vote now counted in Washetanaw, Michigan.
https://electionresults.ewashtenaw.org/electionreporting/nov2016/canvassreport530.html
Clinton wins by 77,690 votes. That's ~6500 votes off Trump's reported 15,000+ vote lead here: http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/michigan
That leaves here finding 9,000 votes MINIMUM from Wayne and Genesee, given the rest of the counties are all solid GOP.
So GOP should be backed for Michigan into around 1.02, 1.45 here is insane.0 -
It really doesn't help to rack up massive wins in California. Or to do exceptionally well but lose in Texas.SandyRentool said:So I think I'm right in saying that the Democrat has got the most votes in 6 out of the last 7 presidential elections?
0 -
To be fair, although I've not been to States for about 15 years, I gather the state of roads, bridges, airports, rail stations is shocking by European standards.IanB2 said:
If I heard him right he promised roads, bridges, schools, and some other things I can't remember as well. And not just ordinary roads and bridges but great, wonderful ones.rottenborough said:
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
Does anyone know what's happening with the MI and NH results - they haven't updated in hours.
0 -
Interesting that a majority of white women voted for Trump, as well as men. Clinton assumed that women would sweep her into the WH. She allowed her own liberal propaganda, and her solid belief in identity politics to lull her into a false sense of security. Corbyn is right in one sense about this being a wake-up call right across the world. Yes - for liberal, metropolitan elites who see white majorities as a nasty inconvenience. People like YOU, Corbyn.0
-
Given that Hillary fell short in exactly those places where she most needed to do well, it is tempting to wonder whether her advertising blitz and sophisticated GOTV operation got out the vote for Trump.0
-
Outside of places where the city spends money on infrastructure that is basically true.rottenborough said:
To be fair, although I've not been to States for about 15 years, I gather the state of roads, bridges, airports, rail stations is shocking by European standards.IanB2 said:
If I heard him right he promised roads, bridges, schools, and some other things I can't remember as well. And not just ordinary roads and bridges but great, wonderful ones.rottenborough said:
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
We could always do what the Italians did from the 1950s-70s, and create a new army corps with a general and a small admin team to do all the paperwork, manage the records for all the soldiers and arrange the deployments etc. - except that the Italians just hired the general and the small admin team, avoiding the cost of all the soldiers by making up details for up to 300,000 of them, and then just let some of the paperwork to leak now and again to the Russians?Casino_Royale said:
It's got jack-all to do with an EU army, although it's a convenient straw-man for the federalists to create one (who then won't follow through with the proper funding)Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
This is about EU nations pumping up their defence spending to 2% of GDP, and taking their responsibilities seriously.
This isn't hard. France/Italy/Spain/Germany/Poland all chipping in as well as the UK could field a very sophisticated and competent battlegroup, consisting of 5-6 corps, alongside the US, and have a standing 150-200k soldiers in the field, and doubling it in case of an emergency.
That would deter Russia.0 -
To be fair, he has a point. Much of the US's infrastructure is in a terrible state: just remember the Mississippi River bridge (in Minnesota?) that collapsed ten or so years ago. They've also had a tragic spate of heavy rail crashes.IanB2 said:
If I heard him right he promised roads, bridges, schools, and some other things I can't remember as well. And not just ordinary roads and bridges but great, wonderful ones.rottenborough said:
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
Thanks. From my calculations, that netted her only ~4,000 votes from when Trump was 15k up. ...dogbasket said:100% of the vote now counted in Washetanaw, Michigan.
https://electionresults.ewashtenaw.org/electionreporting/nov2016/canvassreport530.html
Clinton wins by 77,690 votes. That's ~6500 votes off Trump's reported 15,000+ vote lead here: http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/michigan
That leaves here finding 9,000 votes MINIMUM from Wayne and Genesee, given the rest of the counties are all solid GOP.
So GOP should be backed for Michigan into around 1.02, 1.45 here is insane.0 -
Trump 99% wins MI, Hillary has around 80% chance to win NHanother_richard said:Does anyone know what's happening with the MI and NH results - they haven't updated in hours.
0 -
I should say that of the europeans I know, there is an absolute belief that Mrs Merkel will lay down the law and the USA will have to like it. And the UK will have to do as its told.0
-
Yes, for a while her Twitter feed was indistinguishable from pro-Trump propaganda. She just assumed the message was unpalatable but obviously a lot of registered Democrats in the rust-belt liked what they heard.Richard_Nabavi said:Given that Hillary fell short in exactly those places where she most needed to do well, it is tempting to wonder whether her advertising blitz and sophisticated GOTV operation got out the vote for Trump.
0 -
Slovenia woman becomes First Lady
dr. Miro Cerar @MiroCerar 32m32 minutes ago
PM @MiroCerar congratulates @realDonaldTrump, also expressing satisfaction that the First Lady comes from #sLOVEnia:0 -
SandyRentool said:
So I think I'm right in saying that the Democrat has got the most votes in 6 out of the last 7 presidential elections?
If this had been an AV election rather than FPTP I think Trump may have won the national popular vote through Johnson's preferences. Not to mention the GOP have now won more EC votes than any presidential election since 19880 -
The problem with that is that, assuming that swing states don't sign up for it (as they would lose influence relatively speaking) it requires solid GOP states to go for it as well as solid Dem states. I don't see why they would when the Electoral College systemically favours the GOP (given that small population states are heavily weighted to the GOP).MyBurningEars said:
While the electoral college system is constitutional, it's up to the states how to apportion their electors (hence Nebraska and Maine doing it differently to the rest).SimonStClare said:
Thanks for the reply Mr vik – I suspected as much.vik said:
It's set in aspic by Article II of the Constitution.SimonStClare said:
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?Casino_Royale said:
The popular votePulpstar said:Clinton WINS
To change it, you'd need a majority of 2/3rd in both the House & the Senate, and then ratification by 3/4ths of all States.
So what if some states make a deal that, once enough states have signed up to dominate the electoral college, they will send electors to ensure the national popular vote is upheld, rather than based on their own in-state results?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
I do wonder if there'll be some more momentum for this now.0 -
Ha.IanB2 said:
We could always do what the Italians did from the 1950s-70s, and create a new army corps with a general and a small admin team to do all the paperwork, manage the records for all the soldiers and arrange the deployments etc. - except that the Italians just hired the general and the small admin team, avoiding the cost of all the soldiers by making up details for up to 300,000 of them, and then just let some of the paperwork to leak now and again to the Russians?Casino_Royale said:
It's got jack-all to do with an EU army, although it's a convenient straw-man for the federalists to create one (who then won't follow through with the proper funding)Chelyabinsk said:
Nothing wrong with the existing national armies, if they were funded properly. Five NATO countries pay the recommended 2% minimum towards defence, of which two are the US and the UK. Either NATO is about mutual defence, or it's nothing.Richard_Nabavi said:
You mean - establish an EU Army?glw said:Just to point out the bleeding obvious but maybe EU nations should have taken defence more seriously rather than relying on the Americans for decades upon end?
(runs for cover)
This is about EU nations pumping up their defence spending to 2% of GDP, and taking their responsibilities seriously.
This isn't hard. France/Italy/Spain/Germany/Poland all chipping in as well as the UK could field a very sophisticated and competent battlegroup, consisting of 5-6 corps, alongside the US, and have a standing 150-200k soldiers in the field, and doubling it in case of an emergency.
That would deter Russia.0 -
ROFLPAW said:I should say that of the europeans I know, there is an absolute belief that Mrs Merkel will lay down the law and the USA will have to like it. And the UK will have to do as its told.
0 -
4h
(((Harry Enten))) @ForecasterEnten
Trump won/is winning Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by 1.5 points or less. Tight squeeze, but it worked.
This is white older America saying we still matter. The Democrats have a demographic problem in the short term. Everyone was saying the Republicans a are dead because " demographics are destiny" that has been proven wrong.0 -
It must be a very proud moment for naturalised US citizens that they are not excluded.rottenborough said:Slovenia woman becomes First Lady
dr. Miro Cerar @MiroCerar 32m32 minutes ago
PM @MiroCerar congratulates @realDonaldTrump, also expressing satisfaction that the First Lady comes from #sLOVEnia:0 -
Spot on.Lennon said:
The problem with that is that, assuming that swing states don't sign up for it (as they would lose influence relatively speaking) it requires solid GOP states to go for it as well as solid Dem states. I don't see why they would when the Electoral College systemically favours the GOP (given that small population states are heavily weighted to the GOP).MyBurningEars said:
While the electoral college system is constitutional, it's up to the states how to apportion their electors (hence Nebraska and Maine doing it differently to the rest).SimonStClare said:
Thanks for the reply Mr vik – I suspected as much.vik said:
It's set in aspic by Article II of the Constitution.SimonStClare said:
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?Casino_Royale said:
The popular votePulpstar said:Clinton WINS
To change it, you'd need a majority of 2/3rd in both the House & the Senate, and then ratification by 3/4ths of all States.
So what if some states make a deal that, once enough states have signed up to dominate the electoral college, they will send electors to ensure the national popular vote is upheld, rather than based on their own in-state results?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
I do wonder if there'll be some more momentum for this now.
Just wanted to point out that the "it's set in aspic by Article II of the Constitution" might be bypassable, even if politically infeasible. (Having said that there is some lawyerly argument over whether the Interstate Compact would be legal.)0 -
Trump did a Lynton Crosby whilst having virtually none of the skill of Lynton Crosby.nunu said:
4h
(((Harry Enten))) @ForecasterEnten
Trump won/is winning Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by 1.5 points or less. Tight squeeze, but it worked.
This is white older America saying we still matter. The Democrats have a demographic problem in the short term. Everyone was saying the Republicans a are dead because " demographics are destiny" that has been proven wrong.
Or does he..?0 -
Although a lot of that is state funding, and ballot propositions have basically banned tax rises in a number of states.MaxPB said:
Outside of places where the city spends money on infrastructure that is basically true.rottenborough said:
To be fair, although I've not been to States for about 15 years, I gather the state of roads, bridges, airports, rail stations is shocking by European standards.IanB2 said:
If I heard him right he promised roads, bridges, schools, and some other things I can't remember as well. And not just ordinary roads and bridges but great, wonderful ones.rottenborough said:
LOL. That's not going to stop Donald. He builds hotels using debt.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sorry there's no money left.rottenborough said:What will the note that Obama leaves on the desk say to Trump?
Didn't Obama have a line about 'don't do crazy shit' at one point?0 -
Looks all in all as if Trump's 72 hour blitz was crucial in getting him over the line while Clinton did fewer events he built momentum in the key states0
