politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Now five of the top 6 in the Democratic nomination betting are
Comments
-
Backer. Just.Peter_the_Punter said:
Terminological differences. Let's put some numbers on it. Ladbrokes go 8/11 Conservatives. You a backer or layer?dyedwoolie said:
As I said, 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic in the face of the current evidence. Narrow hold or loss possible, yes. Solid hold suggests a 2000 plus majority which would be a swing to labour of a notable amountPeter_the_Punter said:
It's certainly a hypermarginal but it's equally certainly not the easy Con win you might imagine given a ten point lead nationally - for all the reasons given above and below.dyedwoolie said:
Labour are down by over 10 points, that is nationwide. Nothing suggests their vote will hold up in the SE in seats like this. Even if the Tories also go backwards 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic against the national picture as it stands. It's a hyper marginal.Peter_the_Punter said:
Not so. It's in Leaver seats in the North that the Tories will be looking to turn in a majority winning performance. The South is much tougher, especially if the LD vote holds up.dyedwoolie said:
They have a 187 vote majority if they are on for a solid hold then we should all be lumping on Corbyn as next PMKentRising said:Canterbury will be a solid Labour hold, I reckon, with or without the Lib Dems' co-operation. I live in the constituency and see/feel nothing to suggest otherwise.
0 -
Sorry Mr Partridge, I'm suspicious because we know Party eyes and those working for them are watching sites like this.0
-
Are the Lib Dems a serious political party with a broad domestic agenda?Endillion said:
Speaking as a Tory, leaver, I don't give two hoots what Nigel Farage does or doesn't do. But to answer your question, it's because the Brexit Party aren't claiming to be a serious political party with a broad domestic agenda and ambition to givern to fulfil it: they're unambiguously a single issue protest vote movement that exists solely to force through Brexit; after which they will effectively cease to exist.Stark_Dawning said:Question. Tory Leavers are orgasmic when Nigel stands down his MPs to give their chaps a free run. But when a few Lib Dems decide to do something similar it's turpitude. Why is that?
The seem to be a single issue 'bollocks to Brexit' protest vote movement themselves too.0 -
Half of French workers do not pay 0 taxAlistair said:
What?HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
What do you think that proves.
If (for example) no-one in France earning under 20 thousand Euros paid any tax then it is completely irrelevant what the countries Tax take to GDP is.
Like, I am completely blown away by the utter randomness of your link.0 -
Problem for Gauke is no one on either side of the argument now trusts him. He'll earn his £22k and get some nice corporate gigs and possibly keep his deposit.HYUFD said:0 -
Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.0
-
In which case...Mr Cummings...fire up the Quattro and get this election started. Destroy the Marxists!Mysticrose said:Sorry Mr Partridge, I'm suspicious because we know Party eyes and those working for them are watching sites like this.
0 -
In which case...Mr Cummings...fire up the Quattro and get this election started. Destroy the Marxists!Mysticrose said:Sorry Mr Partridge, I'm suspicious because we know Party eyes and those working for them are watching sites like this.
0 -
There's a much simpler deduction that is much more consistent with the available facts: the government is clueless. Why else would it have gone through so many handbrake turns to end up lamely agreeing to a deal that is disastrous for the country's economy and cuts the nation in two?Philip_Thompson said:FPT
All entirely consistent.viewcode said:
Leavers in Sep 2019: Foolish Remainers! Boris will threaten no deal and get stacks!Wulfrun_Phil said:
Things will have changed if Johnson gets a working majority on Brexit:
1. Up to now I think the EU have been predictably taking a very hard negotiating stance because there was a real possibility that the UK could change its mind if they did, and the UK changing its mind was their preferred outcome. The likes of Blair were lobbying for them not to offer anything. The option of the UK changing its mind will be off the table in future negotiations.
2. They will also know that without the constraints of a Benn Act Mk2 he will have the option of walking away and they will have to regard that as a real rather than imaginary threat.
So it is folly to make a simplistic assumption that future negotiations will be as difficult as what went before, because the context will have changed.
The bottom line is that the EU wants to preserve its export markets in the UK and once it has accepted that we have left it will not be prepared to put those at risk, even if what it ends up with is in its eyes sub-optimal.
Leavers in Oct 2019: Foolish Remainers! Obviously Boris did not intend no deal!
Leavers in Nov 2019: Foolish Remainers! Boris will threaten no deal and get stacks!
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.0 -
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that.0 -
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
Iowa Caucus: Democrats, Buttigieg, is that how you spell it, is in the lead, latest Monmouth poll0
-
Ah okay. Mea culpa. I'm just wary of the Cummings Ruskies.M.Partridge said:
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
Not sure it would help you much, MP. Most punters on here are shrewd enough to be backing value rather than outcomes. For example, I backed the LDs in The Cotswolds today at 17/2, not because I think they will win - they probably won't - but because the odds looked too long.M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Timing is also a factor because facts change, so my portfolio might reflect good calls at the time but look a bit dumb now, or vice versa.
Good luck anyway.0 -
If the activists are pro-Labour then shouldn't they just join the Labour Party?Pulpstar said:Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.
0 -
Never mind the activists, what about the remain tory votes they are trying to win in the South? the mask is slipping....Pulpstar said:Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.
0 -
He's a Labour cheerleader so he'll say this even in the worst of times. If the votes are holding up then all the polls are wrong. I imagine what is happening is there is no collapse, just a trickle effect that would lose Labour 30-40 seats.Mysticrose said:0 -
No problem at all, more just personal intrigue from my part, as I am tempted to bet on a far better Labour position that polls are currently suggesting.Mysticrose said:
Ah okay. Mea culpa. I'm just wary of the Cummings Ruskies.M.Partridge said:
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:0 -
It's not a no-brainer as the other side is equally unappealing.Chris said:
I'm surprised to the extent that the electorate can't see that a Tory majority will mean years of an unscrupulous politician defying the law, and that Johnsonite Conservatism needs a good electoral kicking if we're to avoid an authoritarian future in this country.blueblue said:
I'm surprised to the extent that the electorate can't see that a hung Parliament will mean years of national paralysis, and that Corbynite Labour needs a good electoral kicking if we're to avoid a socialist future in this country.eek said:
And you are surprised by that?blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
Boris has gone out of his way to make Tory Remainers unwelcome (by sacking 27 of them to begin with) while Corbyn really isn't that bothered if we leave or remain.
This election should be a no-brainer. But sadly all it will prove is that the electorate indeed has no brain...
This election should be a no-brainer. But sadly all it will prove is that the electorate indeed has no brain...
[0 -
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.0 -
The government's not gone through any handbrake turns. The government agreed a good deal that is better for the UK, that has no backstop as pledged and which gives democratic control of Northern Ireland's future to Northern Ireland voters rather than trying to foist a solution on them without them getting an ongoing say. Win, win.AlastairMeeks said:There's a much simpler deduction that is much more consistent with the available facts: the government is clueless. Why else would it have gone through so many handbrake turns to end up lamely agreeing to a deal that is disastrous for the country's economy and cuts the nation in two?
The fact this deal is close to what the EU originally proposed just shows how appallingly Theresa May negotiated. She was faced with an unacceptable NI backstop with no unilateral exit and decided the solution was to make that an all-UK backstop with no unilateral exit. Boris instead went back to an NI-only solution and negotiated for NI voters a unilateral exit. Far smarter and far better solution.0 -
I agree with this. From any objective perspective it's surely a correct analysis.KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
But they (Labour) are pitted against the most vitriolic, gunned-up, right wing media onslaught I can remember in my lifetime.
A big question is: does the printed press still hold power? Or will twitter and facebook, which seem much more virulently anti Johnson & chums, have big influence?0 -
What do people expect to happen in the event of a hung parliament, with Labour (or tories) needing SNP and Lib Dem support to form a government? Seems like there are several options, some more plausible than others:
1. Lab minority government, would require Swinson to either vote for Corbyn or possibly abstain depending on the numbers. Would guarantee ref2, would Swinson also demand electoral reform to PR as price of support (she should).
2. Swinson sticks to her word and votes against Corbyn government, could lead to either
2a, alternative GNU caretaker type proposed and Labour MPs decide en masse to support it, would probably need Corbyns tacit approval to have numbers. If Corbyn goes backwards in the election then he will have very little clout so this could well happen
2b, no alternative emerges so second election needed in mid January (probably leading to tory majority)
3. Swinson supports a Tory minority government ine xchange for ref2 on Boris deal - is there any world in which this could happen?
1 seems by far the most likely to me, but many seem to think Swinson really won't allow a Corbyn government even if that's the only route to ref20 -
You can’t trust corbyn who wants to leave.Stereotomy said:
So the MP will have to support a second referendum, Labour's policy. That's apparently good enough to allow Greens, SNP and PC into the Remain Alliance so I can see why some LD activists are confused about why they're being told to help a Tory get elected in that seat instead.PClipp said:But don`t forget the party angle. If an MP takes the Labout whip, then she has to do as she is told. In the case of Labour, this is sometime being in favour of Remaining, and sometimes in favour of Leaving. I certainly would not want anybody to stand aside for a Labour candidate.
0 -
I've done that very thing but I'm nervous about my position.M.Partridge said:
No problem at all, more just personal intrigue from my part, as I am tempted to bet on a far better Labour position that polls are currently suggesting.Mysticrose said:
Ah okay. Mea culpa. I'm just wary of the Cummings Ruskies.M.Partridge said:
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
In 1997 Tory MPs said their vote was holding up better than expected tooBrom said:
He's a Labour cheerleader so he'll say this even in the worst of times. If the votes are holding up then all the polls are wrong. I imagine what is happening is there is no collapse, just a trickle effect that would lose Labour 30-40 seats.Mysticrose said:0 -
Whoah. Hold on.Fenman said:
Pretax. The French tax system will have dragged them back again.SouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
The French tax system has many faults. But it also has some extraordinary features that make assessing how well people have done hard. French tax free allowances stack. So, if there is a family with a husband, a wife and two children, then there are four tax free allowances. Said Frenchman will be paying no income tax, and his healthcare will be included.
In the US, by contrast, healthcare is not included. And while the tax might be lower for a single man, it is not for a family of two, three or four.0 -
I think the "far more pro-Labour left wing activist base" is a concept a decade old, and those who were going to go left ages ago. If not in the Coalition years, then when Corbyn was elected Labour leader.Philip_Thompson said:
If the activists are pro-Labour then shouldn't they just join the Labour Party?Pulpstar said:Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.
The Lib Dem activist base is now predominantly old skool liberals and newer members who are vehement Remainers but not especially left wing. Not to say there aren't some people on the left who left under Clegg but have come back. However, they are not THAT left wing (because, as I say, those that were gravitated to Corbyn's Labour).0 -
Does it really matter what Corbyn rules in or out at this present moment? To be handed the keys of number 10, even for a short while before yet another election, he would promise anything to anyone, I guarantee you. Of course he'd off the SNP a 2nd referendum.HYUFD said:
Corbyn ruled out indyref2 in the first term of a Labour government today, though Labour will come 4th in Scotland anywayStuartDickson said:Why Labour is lost in the middle in Scotland
The argument used to run that Labour - ideology aside - could not afford to allow Scotland to become independent because they'd never form a majority government in Westminster again without their huge block of Scottish MPs.
If they can't rely on Scottish voters to provide those MPs, then their practical objections may fall away. Which could be why Jeremy Corbyn sounds so much more relaxed about an independence referendum than any of his predecessors.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50405399?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/scotland/scotland_politics&link_location=live-reporting-correspondent0 -
No they didn't. I was working for one of them and he certainly didn't think that and nor did his colleagues.HYUFD said:
In 1997 Tory MPs said their vote was holding up better than expected tooBrom said:
He's a Labour cheerleader so he'll say this even in the worst of times. If the votes are holding up then all the polls are wrong. I imagine what is happening is there is no collapse, just a trickle effect that would lose Labour 30-40 seats.Mysticrose said:0 -
Does backloading actually work? The evidence seems to say not. And why not have enough material to load the whole campaign equally - it's only 5 weeks, FGS!KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:0 -
Swinson’s already messed this up and it’s probably too late to correct it.Pulpstar said:Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.
Both Charles Kennedy and Nick Clegg were more effective in capitalising the GEs for the Lib Dems.0 -
Tories heading for their biggest landslide win and Labour for its biggest trouncing since Thatcher's 1983 win with the latest YougovKentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1194300228519759874?s=200 -
Cool, so your evidence that for the average bottom 50% income individual will pay more tax in France is zero then?HYUFD said:
Half of French workers do not pay 0 taxAlistair said:
What?HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
What do you think that proves.
If (for example) no-one in France earning under 20 thousand Euros paid any tax then it is completely irrelevant what the countries Tax take to GDP is.
Like, I am completely blown away by the utter randomness of your link.0 -
Maybe because Swinson said that under no circumstances would the lib dems prop up a Corbyn government? Standing down LDs to favour Labour Remainers is doing the exact opposite, wouldn't you say?Stark_Dawning said:Question. Tory Leavers are orgasmic when Nigel stands down his MPs to give their chaps a free run. But when a few Lib Dems decide to do something similar it's turpitude. Why is that?
0 -
As a general rule I'd be wary of dismissing the kind of message Lewis has tweeted. He's not a Labour cheerleader, by the way either. If he thought the tide was against Corbyn he'd have no hesitation in reporting it.
I think what he has heard ties in with the uptick in Labour support. Will it be enough? I'm not at all sure.0 -
FPT - I think the Conservative Party should be very grateful for the loyalty of Conservative Remainer voters.
They are pretty bloody staunch. Far more so than some (not all) of their MP equivalents.0 -
"But they (Labour) are pitted against the most vitriolic, gunned-up, right wing media onslaught I can remember in my lifetime."Mysticrose said:
I agree with this. From any objective perspective it's surely a correct analysis.KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
But they (Labour) are pitted against the most vitriolic, gunned-up, right wing media onslaught I can remember in my lifetime.
A big question is: does the printed press still hold power? Or will twitter and facebook, which seem much more virulently anti Johnson & chums, have big influence?
It wouldn't be vitriolic enough at 10x the current level!0 -
So Labour wins approx 230 seats, thereby with all the support from its cronies, denying the Tories an overall majority ... job done from Corbyn's perspective. Brexit is denied and we face another GE next year. Is this really your expectation?Brom said:
He's a Labour cheerleader so he'll say this even in the worst of times. If the votes are holding up then all the polls are wrong. I imagine what is happening is there is no collapse, just a trickle effect that would lose Labour 30-40 seats.Mysticrose said:0 -
Uh oh, what's this. Actual knowledge and facts? No no no, much better to do reflexive knee jerk nonsense instead rcs.rcs1000 said:
Whoah. Hold on.Fenman said:
Pretax. The French tax system will have dragged them back again.SouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
The French tax system has many faults. But it also has some extraordinary features that make assessing how well people have done hard. French tax free allowances stack. So, if there is a family with a husband, a wife and two children, then there are four tax free allowances. Said Frenchman will be paying no income tax, and his healthcare will be included.
In the US, by contrast, healthcare is not included. And while the tax might be lower for a single man, it is not for a family of two, three or four.0 -
Day after Johnson won the Tory leadership -Philip_Thompson said:All entirely consistent.
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.
"Hello, Brussels Sprouts, Boris here. PM."
"Boris! How goes it?"
"Fine, fine. Look, you know that deal you offered us two years ago?"
"Ah yes, the one where NI stays but GB leaves?"
"That's the one. It was your first choice, in fact, wasn't it?"
"Oui oui."
"Terrific. So can we still have it?"
"Course you can, mon ami!"
He could have done that.0 -
Probably, at least if the SNP won a majority at Holyrood 2021.Jason said:
Does it really matter what Corbyn rules in or out at this present moment? To be handed the keys of number 10, even for a short while before yet another election, he would promise anything to anyone, I guarantee you. Of course he'd off the SNP a 2nd referendum.HYUFD said:
Corbyn ruled out indyref2 in the first term of a Labour government today, though Labour will come 4th in Scotland anywayStuartDickson said:Why Labour is lost in the middle in Scotland
The argument used to run that Labour - ideology aside - could not afford to allow Scotland to become independent because they'd never form a majority government in Westminster again without their huge block of Scottish MPs.
If they can't rely on Scottish voters to provide those MPs, then their practical objections may fall away. Which could be why Jeremy Corbyn sounds so much more relaxed about an independence referendum than any of his predecessors.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50405399?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/scotland/scotland_politics&link_location=live-reporting-correspondent
Which is why Unionist Scots must vote Tory or LD0 -
Betting warning.HYUFD said:
Tories heading for their biggest landslide winKentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
The above post comes from a man who said Orban would veto the Johnson extension. And then Macron would. And a thousand other blindfold predictions on here. He did once stick the tail on the donkey's backside though.0 -
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.0 -
No it is as I posted, France takes higher tax out of gdp and most of the bottom 50% in France will pay some taxAlistair said:
Cool, so your evidence that for the average bottom 50% income individual will pay more tax in France is zero then?HYUFD said:
Half of French workers do not pay 0 taxAlistair said:
What?HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
What do you think that proves.
If (for example) no-one in France earning under 20 thousand Euros paid any tax then it is completely irrelevant what the countries Tax take to GDP is.
Like, I am completely blown away by the utter randomness of your link.0 -
YOu can see from Swinson's reaction to Canterbury that the libs are very keen to prevent their southern targets getting the feeling they will prop up Corbyn. Which of course they will.Jason said:
Maybe because Swinson said that under no circumstances would the lib dems prop up a Corbyn government? Standing down LDs to favour Labour Remainers is doing the exact opposite, wouldn't you say?Stark_Dawning said:Question. Tory Leavers are orgasmic when Nigel stands down his MPs to give their chaps a free run. But when a few Lib Dems decide to do something similar it's turpitude. Why is that?
0 -
The Tory Leaver votes stayed with the party through decades of being led by Remainers.Casino_Royale said:FPT - I think the Conservative Party should be very grateful for the loyalty of Conservative Remainer voters.
They are pretty bloody staunch. Far more so than some (not all) of their MP equivalents.
Corbyn or not Corbyn is a much more important division than Leave or Remain.0 -
Macron would without a GE or EUref2, we are in a GE.Mysticrose said:
Betting warning.HYUFD said:
Tories heading for their biggest landslide winKentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
The above post comes from a man who said Orban would veto the Johnson extension. And then Macron would. And a thousand other blindfold predictions on here. He did once stick the tail on the donkey's backside though.
I also predicted Boris PM0 -
I'm not sure. Just anecdata, but the Lib Dem activists I see on Facebook and Reddit are almost universally hostile to Swinson's Canterbury stance.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think the "far more pro-Labour left wing activist base" is a concept a decade old, and those who were going to go left ages ago. If not in the Coalition years, then when Corbyn was elected Labour leader.Philip_Thompson said:
If the activists are pro-Labour then shouldn't they just join the Labour Party?Pulpstar said:Swinson's vehement anti-Corbyn / pro-Europe centre message running into the far more pro Labour left wing activist base of the Lib Dems.
The Lib Dem activist base is now predominantly old skool liberals and newer members who are vehement Remainers but not especially left wing. Not to say there aren't some people on the left who left under Clegg but have come back. However, they are not THAT left wing (because, as I say, those that were gravitated to Corbyn's Labour).0 -
Tremble before the gerontocrats!0
-
No, I don't think it works, and I personally think the Tories' distinctly underwhelming campaign so far is not part of some grand design, CCHQ is just crap, as shown in 2017. I'd be very worried that with four weeks *still* to go, the lead is shrinking bit by bit. Have the Tories got anything that can change the narrative? After 9 years in power it's very difficult to get a hearing with the electorate.blueblue said:
Does backloading actually work? The evidence seems to say not. And why not have enough material to load the whole campaign equally - it's only 5 weeks, FGS!KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:0 -
Shadsy knows his onions. Personally I'd go 10/11 the two, but as you suggest, no meaningful margin, so no bet.dyedwoolie said:
Backer. Just.Peter_the_Punter said:
Terminological differences. Let's put some numbers on it. Ladbrokes go 8/11 Conservatives. You a backer or layer?dyedwoolie said:
As I said, 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic in the face of the current evidence. Narrow hold or loss possible, yes. Solid hold suggests a 2000 plus majority which would be a swing to labour of a notable amountPeter_the_Punter said:
It's certainly a hypermarginal but it's equally certainly not the easy Con win you might imagine given a ten point lead nationally - for all the reasons given above and below.dyedwoolie said:
Labour are down by over 10 points, that is nationwide. Nothing suggests their vote will hold up in the SE in seats like this. Even if the Tories also go backwards 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic against the national picture as it stands. It's a hyper marginal.Peter_the_Punter said:
Not so. It's in Leaver seats in the North that the Tories will be looking to turn in a majority winning performance. The South is much tougher, especially if the LD vote holds up.dyedwoolie said:
They have a 187 vote majority if they are on for a solid hold then we should all be lumping on Corbyn as next PMKentRising said:Canterbury will be a solid Labour hold, I reckon, with or without the Lib Dems' co-operation. I live in the constituency and see/feel nothing to suggest otherwise.
Try The Cotswolds!0 -
Not sure historical norms matters much with Trump, he is a unique proposition - you could equally argue the other way that Democrats will be taking on the President who right now has the worst Net Approval rating in history* for an incumbent at this point in the cycle, so if they cant beat him they cant beat anyone. But we are through the looking glass.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that.
*he may be better than Carter but that's about to change according to 538
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/0 -
Agree all round.Stark_Dawning said:
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.
Frankly I'm astonished Johnson is going into the debates. Nothing to gain. Everything to lose.0 -
Think the clown saying not in the first term of a Labour government kind of shoots that fox, he is a numpty.StuartDickson said:Why Labour is lost in the middle in Scotland
The argument used to run that Labour - ideology aside - could not afford to allow Scotland to become independent because they'd never form a majority government in Westminster again without their huge block of Scottish MPs.
If they can't rely on Scottish voters to provide those MPs, then their practical objections may fall away. Which could be why Jeremy Corbyn sounds so much more relaxed about an independence referendum than any of his predecessors.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50405399?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/scotland/scotland_politics&link_location=live-reporting-correspondent0 -
Beware of extrapolation from small datasets.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that.0 -
But that deal had no democratic control in it. In fact we were repeatedly told that there could be no unilateral exit from the backstop or there was no backstop. Plus in the original deal NI wouldn't have benefited from the UK's trade deals while under Boris's deal it does. So two pretty massive changes from the original proposal.kinabalu said:
Day after Johnson won the Tory leadership -Philip_Thompson said:All entirely consistent.
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.
"Hello, Brussels Sprouts, Boris here. PM."
"Boris! How goes it?"
"Fine, fine. Look, you know that deal you offered us two years ago?"
"Ah yes, the one where NI stays but GB leaves?"
"That's the one. It was your first choice, in fact, wasn't it?"
"Oui oui."
"Terrific. So can we still have it?"
"Course you can, mon ami!"
He could have done that.
But absolutely it was a great idea to junk Theresa May's ludicrous concessions and go back to a saner starting point.0 -
The Tory lead is NOT shrinking according to the latest poll. Jesus!KentRising said:
No, I don't think it works, and I personally think the Tories' distinctly underwhelming campaign so far is not part of some grand design, CCHQ is just crap, as shown in 2017. I'd be very worried that with four weeks *still* to go, the lead is shrinking bit by bit. Have the Tories got anything that can change the narrative? After 9 years in power it's very difficult to get a hearing with the electorate.blueblue said:
Does backloading actually work? The evidence seems to say not. And why not have enough material to load the whole campaign equally - it's only 5 weeks, FGS!KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1194300228519759874?s=200 -
I heard that live. He went all Jim Davidson. Hilarious.El_Capitano said:Gove comes quickly, whatever you do:
https://twitter.com/andysilke/status/11945415552914309130 -
Trump has a higher approval rating than Obama at this stage as well as Carter on some pollsrawzer said:
Not sure historical norms matters much with Trump, he is a unique proposition - you could equally argue the other way that Democrats will be taking on the President who right now has the worst Net Approval rating in history* for an incumbent at this point in the cycle, so if they cant beat him they cant beat anyone. But we are through the looking glass.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that.
*he may be better than Carter but that's about to change according to 538
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/0 -
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.0 -
May was excoriated for dodging them. BJ had little choice.Mysticrose said:
Agree all round.Stark_Dawning said:
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.
Frankly I'm astonished Johnson is going into the debates. Nothing to gain. Everything to lose.
It's high risk. No Corbyn fan but I think he's good at that kind of thing. Not sure about BJ.0 -
Usual bollocks from @HYUFD. Nothing to see here, move on.rcs1000 said:
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.0 -
I think the general picture fractionally favours the Tories but yeah it's not one I'm lumping onPeter_the_Punter said:
Shadsy knows his onions. Personally I'd go 10/11 the two, but as you suggest, no meaningful margin, so no bet.dyedwoolie said:
Backer. Just.Peter_the_Punter said:
Terminological differences. Let's put some numbers on it. Ladbrokes go 8/11 Conservatives. You a backer or layer?dyedwoolie said:
As I said, 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic in the face of the current evidence. Narrow hold or loss possible, yes. Solid hold suggests a 2000 plus majority which would be a swing to labour of a notable amountPeter_the_Punter said:
It's certainly a hypermarginal but it's equally certainly not the easy Con win you might imagine given a ten point lead nationally - for all the reasons given above and below.dyedwoolie said:
Labour are down by over 10 points, that is nationwide. Nothing suggests their vote will hold up in the SE in seats like this. Even if the Tories also go backwards 'solid hold' is hopelessly optimistic against the national picture as it stands. It's a hyper marginal.Peter_the_Punter said:
Not so. It's in Leaver seats in the North that the Tories will be looking to turn in a majority winning performance. The South is much tougher, especially if the LD vote holds up.dyedwoolie said:
They have a 187 vote majority if they are on for a solid hold then we should all be lumping on Corbyn as next PMKentRising said:Canterbury will be a solid Labour hold, I reckon, with or without the Lib Dems' co-operation. I live in the constituency and see/feel nothing to suggest otherwise.
Try The Cotswolds!0 -
Are you committed to this bollocks?HYUFD said:
No it is as I posted, France takes higher tax out of gdp and most of the bottom 50% in France will pay some taxAlistair said:
Cool, so your evidence that for the average bottom 50% income individual will pay more tax in France is zero then?HYUFD said:
Half of French workers do not pay 0 taxAlistair said:
What?HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
What do you think that proves.
If (for example) no-one in France earning under 20 thousand Euros paid any tax then it is completely irrelevant what the countries Tax take to GDP is.
Like, I am completely blown away by the utter randomness of your link.0 -
ok, so you've looked at the polls, but I think you're being a bit disingenuous.Alistair said:
Using the 538 aggregated polls we see that:kamski said:
Not really, have a look for yourself eg Pennsylvania (Wisconsin and Michigan are similar):Alistair said:
For a certain definition of OK. I.e. Cherry pick the polls that have him not bring crushed.kamski said:I see there's a new Georgia poll out showing Trump behind all the potential Dem candidates. It's interesting because the assumption was the easiest path to Dems winning the Electoral College would be flipping Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvia (plus keeping everything they won in 2016). But in some recent polls Trump is doing OK in those states, he could easily hold on to one (or more) leaving the Dems needing somewhere else. Maybe Georgia will be easier than Florida in 2020.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/pennsylvania/
The latest poll shows Trump just ahead of both Sanders and Warren with likely voters (with an A+ rated pollster, too).
Cherry-picking would be taking the 3rd most recent poll which has Trump 11 ahead of Warren in Pennsylvania.
Or listen to the podcast for more analysis of this:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-could-trump-lose-the-popular-vote-and-win-again/
In Wisconsin out of 43 match ups Trump leads in 4 of them.
In Michigan out of 50 match ups Trump leads in 9 of them.
In Pennsylvania out of 29 match ups Trump leads in 7 of them.
If that's OK I'd hate to see what doing badly looks like.
In Pennsylvania those 29 match-ups are from just 8 polls from March to November this year. There's only 2 matchups where the Dem is "crushing" Trump - if you define crushing as a double-digit poll lead: a poll showing Biden 11 ahead in May, another showing Biden 10 ahead in March. Biden is the only Dem candidate consistently leading Trump, and the latest Pennsylvania poll has Biden just 1 ahead amongst likely voters and 3 ahead with registered voters (and he still does better than Warren and Sanders). This latest poll is also the only one from a pollster with the highest pollster rating from fivethirtyeight, fwiw (they also claim that this pollster has a +0.3 Republican bias)
If you look at what the betting says is the likeliest Dem candidate, Warren ranges from 5% ahead of Trump in March to 2 behind (LV, even RV) in the latest poll.
I really can't see how that can really be described as "being crushed". It shows Trump doing depressingly well at the moment in those states, he only needs to hold on to one of them plus keep the rest that he won in 2016 to win in the electoral college again.
but, like I say, listen to the podcast if you want to hear an alternative argument from people who know a lot more than I do.0 -
Lots of paranoia on hereM.Partridge said:
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
To be fair, YouGov is our best poll. Survation has 6, a couple more have 8s, Kantar's adjusted us down to 10. Why can't we hold at a particular level?HYUFD said:
The Tory lead is NOT shrinking according to the latest poll. Jesus!KentRising said:
No, I don't think it works, and I personally think the Tories' distinctly underwhelming campaign so far is not part of some grand design, CCHQ is just crap, as shown in 2017. I'd be very worried that with four weeks *still* to go, the lead is shrinking bit by bit. Have the Tories got anything that can change the narrative? After 9 years in power it's very difficult to get a hearing with the electorate.blueblue said:
Does backloading actually work? The evidence seems to say not. And why not have enough material to load the whole campaign equally - it's only 5 weeks, FGS!KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1194300228519759874?s=200 -
No, no, no! They do this every election. When an election is announced they go with the existing methodology and then tweak it about a month out. This last-minute fucking around is the reason why YouGov's normal 2017 poll (not it's MRP one) was inaccurate in the last few weeks - they overcorrected. It's annoying, but it's not sinister.blueblue said:Re: Kantar, isn't changing your polling methodology in the _middle_ of an election campaign deeply suspect? Although it still shows a 10-point Tory lead, the 3-point cuts just feeds into the narrative of Labour closing the gap and therefore affects the perception of the election campaign itself?
0 -
FPT
Nobody is pretending there isn't. What I dispute is that people are seeking dialogue at all to progress in any way, they are seeking affirmation. Indeed, people try to magnify it.noneoftheabove said:
Those are the starting viewpoints for many within each group, they should be expressed honestly. To get away from those viewpoints you need a dialogue not pretending there isnt a huge discrepancy that is causing division between the generations.kle4 said:
A conversation is not what many are after. They want to demonize the old or insult the young. You're right that generations understanding if disagreeing with the majority view of the other is important, but I dont think we get much understanding being sought, just 'you stole our future/you're youth idiots', if not in those exact words.noneoftheabove said:
Discussing why different groups have different views on Brexit is essential to the country moving forward. Yes language can get out of hand on both sides, but the conversation whilst difficult must be had between the generations.kle4 said:
More young back remain and more old back Brexit, we all know this, but trying to amplify generational differences, escalate anger and contempt, is wrong no matter which side it comes from. And 'they started it' is an excuse we are taught is dumb as children, when used as justification for poor behaviour.Nigel_Foremain said:
Bit rich even for you! People who have pushed Brexit are the ones that "pit generation against generation", and as for stupidity, well, I think it has long been established that the more educated are not in favour of the stupidity called Brexit. In this instance it is the youngest who are most wise.Brom said:
Not all young people are this stupid and wish to pit generation against generation.148grss said:0 -
Sporting index currently has buy on 206 labour seats, that's 1983 level of poor result for Labour. I just cant see that. Personally I dont think Corbyn can get near a majority but 250/260 seems very realistic to meMysticrose said:
I've done that very thing but I'm nervous about my position.M.Partridge said:
No problem at all, more just personal intrigue from my part, as I am tempted to bet on a far better Labour position that polls are currently suggesting.Mysticrose said:
Ah okay. Mea culpa. I'm just wary of the Cummings Ruskies.M.Partridge said:
I may not post a huge amount but my account is around 4 years old, so I dont really think I class as that new to be fair.Mysticrose said:
That wasn't the question.M.Partridge said:
A Conservative yes, but a remainer, so most likely voting Lib DemMysticrose said:
Are you a Cummings bot?M.Partridge said:Can I ask other PBers what bets they have going on for the UK election at the moment, intrigued to get the feel of where you think it is going.
Someone new comes on here and asks us all how we feel things are going.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .....0 -
Do you think that matters to a Tory, any lie does they are not particular.rcs1000 said:
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.0 -
BJ seems to um and err when presented with anything he isn't prepared for. Equally he seems to say whatever comes into his mouth.Peter_the_Punter said:
May was excoriated for dodging them. BJ had little choice.Mysticrose said:
Agree all round.Stark_Dawning said:
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.
Frankly I'm astonished Johnson is going into the debates. Nothing to gain. Everything to lose.
It's high risk. No Corbyn fan but I think he's good at that kind of thing. Not sure about BJ.
It may go fine but if BJ is presented with questions which require facts he hasn't got it could be a complete disaster...
1 -
Although that said, state taxes are a small proportion of federal. New York is one of the highest taxing states and our highest marginal income tax rate is just 7% compared to a highest federal marginal rate of 37%.rcs1000 said:
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.0 -
I responded to this on the previous post. I'm on the tablet and I don't know how to cut-and-paste, so I'm going to have to leave it there.Philip_Thompson said:FPT
All entirely consistent.viewcode said:
Leavers in Sep 2019: Foolish Remainers! Boris will threaten no deal and get stacks!Wulfrun_Phil said:
Things will have changed if Johnson gets a working majority on Brexit:Philip_Thompson said:
You've never heard of Country of Origin?148grss said:
The problem is, how can we import goods from the US that the EU won't allow exported into the EU without huge bureaucracy? The US want us to be the gateway into the EU for all their goods, and the EU want to protect their goods and standards. With both pulling in opposite directions, getting a deal that satisfies both will be very difficult. Getting a deal that satisfies both AND the British public would be almost impossible.
We're not inventing the wheel here. Many countries and regions [including the EU itself of course] have multiple trade agreements. Country of Origin is well established and already works within EU systems.
1. Up to now I think the EU have been predictably taking a very hard negotiating stance because there was a real possibility that the UK could change its mind if they did, and the UK changing its mind was their preferred outcome. The likes of Blair were lobbying for them not to offer anything. The option of the UK changing its mind will be off the table in future negotiations.
2. They will also know that without the constraints of a Benn Act Mk2 he will have the option of walking away and they will have to regard that as a real rather than imaginary threat.
So it is folly to make a simplistic assumption that future negotiations will be as difficult as what went before, because the context will have changed.
The bottom line is that the EU wants to preserve its export markets in the UK and once it has accepted that we have left it will not be prepared to put those at risk, even if what it ends up with is in its eyes sub-optimal.
Leavers in Oct 2019: Foolish Remainers! Obviously Boris did not intend no deal!
Leavers in Nov 2019: Foolish Remainers! Boris will threaten no deal and get stacks!
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.0 -
The problem Trump has is that he also has problems in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina from a very different type of voter that he didn't have before.kamski said:
is the only Dem candidate consistently leading Trump, and the latest Pennsylvania poll has Biden just 1 ahead amongst likely voters and 3 ahead with registered voters (and he still does better than Warren and Sanders). This latest poll is also the only one from a pollster with the highest pollster rating from fivethirtyeight, fwiw (they also claim that this pollster has a +0.3 Republican bias)Alistair said:
Using the 538 aggregated polls we see that:kamski said:
Not really, have a look for yourself eg Pennsylvania (Wisconsin and Michigan are similar):Alistair said:
For a certain definition of OK. I.e. Cherry pick the polls that have him not bring crushed.kamski said:I see there's a new Georgia poll out showing Trump behind all the potential Dem candidates. It's interesting because the assumption was the easiest path to Dems winning the Electoral College would be flipping Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvia (plus keeping everything they won in 2016). But in some recent polls Trump is doing OK in those states, he could easily hold on to one (or more) leaving the Dems needing somewhere else. Maybe Georgia will be easier than Florida in 2020.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/pennsylvania/
The latest poll shows Trump just ahead of both Sanders and Warren with likely voters (with an A+ rated pollster, too).
Cherry-picking would be taking the 3rd most recent poll which has Trump 11 ahead of Warren in Pennsylvania.
Or listen to the podcast for more analysis of this:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-could-trump-lose-the-popular-vote-and-win-again/
In Wisconsin out of 43 match ups Trump leads in 4 of them.
In Michigan out of 50 match ups Trump leads in 9 of them.
In Pennsylvania out of 29 match ups Trump leads in 7 of them.
If that's OK I'd hate to see what doing badly looks like.
If you look at what the betting says is the likeliest Dem candidate, Warren ranges from 5% ahead of Trump in March to 2 behind (LV, even RV) in the latest poll.
I really can't see how that can really be described as "being crushed". It shows Trump doing depressingly well at the moment in those states, he only needs to hold on to one of them plus keep the rest that he won in 2016 to win in the electoral college again.
but, like I say, listen to the podcast if you want to hear an alternative argument from people who know a lot more than I do.0 -
Sounds as if the Canterbury bloke was a loose cannon though whom Swinson has now replaced and subjected to disciplinary procedure. Nigel's capitulation on Boris's fake Brexit seems far more egregious to me - he's forcing good Leaver folk to have no option other than to vote for a con job.Jason said:
Maybe because Swinson said that under no circumstances would the lib dems prop up a Corbyn government? Standing down LDs to favour Labour Remainers is doing the exact opposite, wouldn't you say?Stark_Dawning said:Question. Tory Leavers are orgasmic when Nigel stands down his MPs to give their chaps a free run. But when a few Lib Dems decide to do something similar it's turpitude. Why is that?
0 -
Indeed but I don't know why he's chosen to go head to head with Corbyn. I don't see how two viable alternative PM's approach helps Boris unless he thinks he can defeat Corbyn in it.Peter_the_Punter said:
May was excoriated for dodging them. BJ had little choice.Mysticrose said:
Agree all round.Stark_Dawning said:
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.
Frankly I'm astonished Johnson is going into the debates. Nothing to gain. Everything to lose.
It's high risk. No Corbyn fan but I think he's good at that kind of thing. Not sure about BJ.
Johnson should I'd think have gone for a sort of 'Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' approach - get on the stage as the PM versus a whole bunch of minor party leaders none of which are going to become PM with Corbyn amongst their number.0 -
HYUFD also predicted on many occasions that Johnson would resign rather than seek an extension.Mysticrose said:
Betting warning.HYUFD said:
Tories heading for their biggest landslide winKentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
The above post comes from a man who said Orban would veto the Johnson extension. And then Macron would. And a thousand other blindfold predictions on here. He did once stick the tail on the donkey's backside though.0 -
Those high federal rates don't hit the bottom half of the population though, while lots of states have flat taxes that do.rpjs said:
Although that said, state taxes are a small proportion of federal. New York is one of the highest taxing states and our highest marginal income tax rate is just 7% compared to a highest federal marginal rate of 37%.rcs1000 said:
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.
I have also read that the US has a pretty progressive taxation system. It just has very regressive spending patterns. The vast majority is on social security and Medicare, which spend more on rich people than poor people because the rich live longer.0 -
But that's the point Brexiteers are making. We need someone like Boris to be PM who will seriously prepare for No Deal not 'Foolish Remainers' like Hammond and May who terminally weakened the UK's negotiating position when they were in power.viewcode said:
I don't think your second paragraph is consistent with the third. We are prepared for war - or at least we hope we do. We buy equipment, hold reviews, upgrade kit, hold exercises. We are not prepared for no deal - the operations are mounted half heartedly and then cancelled. The Latin tag is not "Si vis pacem, pretendum para bellum with mop".Philip_Thompson said:All entirely consistent.
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.
Boris achieved in his deal concessions the EU always said were impossible while we were led by May and Hammond. Funny that!0 -
Regarding the debates, I can only think the Tories are willing to gamble that if Boris does well - proper well, as in, like in the final referendum debate in 2016 - it could catapult them from hung parliament to solid majority level. Trundling along as they are now, hung parliament is a real possibility. Let's not forget, Boris needs a majority to be PM, there are no more allies.0
-
On the averages he is behind Obama now and the trend is not his friend. He is about to go behind Carter. By the election he may be ahead of GWB, Carter and LBJ - but as I say it just doesn't feel like history helps us - its not a normal situation over thereHYUFD said:
Trump has a higher approval rating than Obama at this stage as well as Carter on some pollsrawzer said:
Not sure historical norms matters much with Trump, he is a unique proposition - you could equally argue the other way that Democrats will be taking on the President who right now has the worst Net Approval rating in history* for an incumbent at this point in the cycle, so if they cant beat him they cant beat anyone. But we are through the looking glass.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that.
*he may be better than Carter but that's about to change according to 538
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/0 -
Funny. I feel confident about Pennsylvania and Michigan but I think Wisconsin is a real worry.rcs1000 said:
Wisconsin will go blue in 2020. Michigan and Pennsylvania are harder calls.kamski said:I see there's a new Georgia poll out showing Trump behind all the potential Dem candidates. It's interesting because the assumption was the easiest path to Dems winning the Electoral College would be flipping Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvia (plus keeping everything they won in 2016). But in some recent polls Trump is doing OK in those states, he could easily hold on to one (or more) leaving the Dems needing somewhere else. Maybe Georgia will be easier than Florida in 2020.
The Trump tariff war has hammered Iowa farmers, and I think that could flip. Arizona is becoming bluer by the day, and I think that's also likely to go to the Dems.
Which makes this a pretty exciting election.0 -
Full power! Ramming speed!ozymandias said:
In which case...Mr Cummings...fire up the Quattro and get this election started. Destroy the Marxists!Mysticrose said:Sorry Mr Partridge, I'm suspicious because we know Party eyes and those working for them are watching sites like this.
Um, how fast is that, sir?
It's very fast, Evans!
But... we're already going at full speed!
Never mind, Evans! We are going to ram them!
We have remaining weapons, sir. Plus they can move out of the way...
Foolish navigator! Ramming speed now!
Righty-ho, sir! (Tiptoes to escape pod)
Evans, come back! Come here and die pointlessly!
No thank you, sir (evacuates ship)
Aaargh! (Big crash of mangled metal) 1 -
You know this?contrarian said:
YOu can see from Swinson's reaction to Canterbury that the libs are very keen to prevent their southern targets getting the feeling they will prop up Corbyn. Which of course they will.Jason said:
Maybe because Swinson said that under no circumstances would the lib dems prop up a Corbyn government? Standing down LDs to favour Labour Remainers is doing the exact opposite, wouldn't you say?Stark_Dawning said:Question. Tory Leavers are orgasmic when Nigel stands down his MPs to give their chaps a free run. But when a few Lib Dems decide to do something similar it's turpitude. Why is that?
It's a betting Site. Fake news not welcome.1 -
Yes, HYUFD should be comparing the US’s 27% with the EU’s 1%.rcs1000 said:
Whoah, whoah, whoah.HYUFD said:
France takes 47% of gdp in tax, the US 27%Alistair said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:
After tax income is still higher in the USSouthamObserver said:Making the UK less European and more like the US is not going to end well.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1194584527836008448
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
That is CENTRAL tax take. France is highly centralised. The US is highly decentralised.
Not only that, but knowing the total tax take tells you nothing about how it is shared between the various income segments.0 -
Sampling variation covers +- a couple of percent between polls.blueblue said:
To be fair, YouGov is our best poll. Survation has 6, a couple more have 8s, Kantar's adjusted us down to 10. Why can't we hold at a particular level?HYUFD said:
The Tory lead is NOT shrinking according to the latest poll. Jesus!KentRising said:
No, I don't think it works, and I personally think the Tories' distinctly underwhelming campaign so far is not part of some grand design, CCHQ is just crap, as shown in 2017. I'd be very worried that with four weeks *still* to go, the lead is shrinking bit by bit. Have the Tories got anything that can change the narrative? After 9 years in power it's very difficult to get a hearing with the electorate.blueblue said:
Does backloading actually work? The evidence seems to say not. And why not have enough material to load the whole campaign equally - it's only 5 weeks, FGS!KentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1194300228519759874?s=200 -
Isn't there a XKCD for this, oh future billionaire?rcs1000 said:
Beware of extrapolation from small datasets.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that. 0 -
And that BJ was happy to leave without a deal...anothernick said:
HYUFD also predicted on many occasions that Johnson would resign rather than seek an extension.Mysticrose said:
Betting warning.HYUFD said:
Tories heading for their biggest landslide winKentRising said:
Definitely think Labour are having the better campaign (again), they are leading the news agenda every day (not always for negative reasons) and the Tory poll lead is trending smaller, however gradual. Two weeks since the election passed through the HoC and still waiting for the Tories to move onto the front foot. Maybe they're backloading everything.Mysticrose said:
The above post comes from a man who said Orban would veto the Johnson extension. And then Macron would. And a thousand other blindfold predictions on here. He did once stick the tail on the donkey's backside though.0 -
Did you look at the comment I was responding to???eek said:
It's not a no-brainer as the other side is equally unappealing.Chris said:
I'm surprised to the extent that the electorate can't see that a Tory majority will mean years of an unscrupulous politician defying the law, and that Johnsonite Conservatism needs a good electoral kicking if we're to avoid an authoritarian future in this country.blueblue said:
I'm surprised to the extent that the electorate can't see that a hung Parliament will mean years of national paralysis, and that Corbynite Labour needs a good electoral kicking if we're to avoid a socialist future in this country.eek said:
And you are surprised by that?blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
Boris has gone out of his way to make Tory Remainers unwelcome (by sacking 27 of them to begin with) while Corbyn really isn't that bothered if we leave or remain.
This election should be a no-brainer. But sadly all it will prove is that the electorate indeed has no brain...
This election should be a no-brainer. But sadly all it will prove is that the electorate indeed has no brain...
[0 -
Isn't one of the debates going to be of the Snow White variety?Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but I don't know why he's chosen to go head to head with Corbyn. I don't see how two viable alternative PM's approach helps Boris unless he thinks he can defeat Corbyn in it.Peter_the_Punter said:
May was excoriated for dodging them. BJ had little choice.Mysticrose said:
Agree all round.Stark_Dawning said:
Agreed. The debates could be deadly. If Corbyn comes across as a dull-but-dependable time-and-motion inspector - and not the hideous Marxist monster of Daily Express legend - then people might think about giving him ago as opposed to Boris's randomness. I suspect Boris will find an excuse to cancel - the risk is just too great.blueblue said:
I certainly don't want it to, but (1) The Tory lead started at a much lower level than last time; (2) Labour is already creeping up, with a month left to go; (3) The Lib Dems are being squeezed by Lab; (4) The Lab manifesto will contain enough gigantic giveaways to sway a lot of people; (5) The debates are a wild card, but perhaps the calm reasonableness with which Corbyn spins his utopian dream will be effective; (6) The winning message of "Get Brexit Done" seems to be weakening.basicbridge said:
2017 is not repeating itself...blueblue said:Also living up to my name, but it does seem like 2017 is repeating itself in all too horrific a way, leading to a repeat of the phenomenon that led to a hung Parliament then: an election campaign makes Labour Leavers forget about Brexit and return to their home party, whereas in the same campaign Tory Remainers don't forget about Brexit and don't return home...
ARRGHRGRHRGRHGHRH!
I'm flipping terrified.
Frankly I'm astonished Johnson is going into the debates. Nothing to gain. Everything to lose.
It's high risk. No Corbyn fan but I think he's good at that kind of thing. Not sure about BJ.
Johnson should I'd think have gone for a sort of 'Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' approach - get on the stage as the PM versus a whole bunch of minor party leaders none of which are going to become PM with Corbyn amongst their number.
Head to head with Corbyn seems fraught with danger. He'd be better off with Swinson there too, just to loosen it up a bit. Johnson may emerge victorious. After all he has a double first in Bullshit and Bluster. Downside risk is huge though.0 -
@rcs1000 , in the event of you ever becoming a billionaire and a potential employer, may I point out that I have always admired your ginger hair and capacity to wave your hands around...viewcode said:
Isn't there a XKCD for this, oh future billionaire?rcs1000 said:
Beware of extrapolation from small datasets.HYUFD said:
Only Reagan since WW2 has beaten an incumbent president after only one term of his party in the White HouseSirNorfolkPassmore said:
Your statement was still inaccurate - I was simply pointing that out.HYUFD said:
OK him too but after 12 years of GOP presidents again not 4SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Clinton also faced an incumbent President.HYUFD said:JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama all got in after 8 years of a GOP President and only Carter faced the incumbent president. In 2020 the Democrats will have to beat an incumbent president after only one one term and 4 years in power.
I agree that defeating an incumbent (even a fairly unpopular one) is harder than winning an election with no incumbent. However, it's not a particularly original idea, and there are several examples of candidates doing just that. 0 -
He gave the concessions. he threw his Northern Ireland DUP "friends" under a bus. The "deal" is otherwise exactly the same as TMay's. Only fanboys like you can't see it because you so want to love himPhilip_Thompson said:
But that's the point Brexiteers are making. We need someone like Boris to be PM who will seriously prepare for No Deal not 'Foolish Remainers' like Hammond and May who terminally weakened the UK's negotiating position when they were in power.viewcode said:
I don't think your second paragraph is consistent with the third. We are prepared for war - or at least we hope we do. We buy equipment, hold reviews, upgrade kit, hold exercises. We are not prepared for no deal - the operations are mounted half heartedly and then cancelled. The Latin tag is not "Si vis pacem, pretendum para bellum with mop".Philip_Thompson said:All entirely consistent.
You have to seriously be prepared to threaten to walk away with no deal in order to get a good deal, that doesn't mean you intend no deal.
Just the same as you spend on your military in order to have peace. The Romans had an expression: Si vis pacem, para bellum that logic was known thousands of years ago is still relevant today.
PS if you wanted no deal you wouldn't threaten it, you'd just prepare for it and walk away without engaging in negotiations.
Boris achieved in his deal concessions the EU always said were impossible while we were led by May and Hammond. Funny that!0 -
'Equally he seems to say whatever comes into his mouth.'
Yuk.
0 -
Thy are just ramping thinking they can scare the lib dems on here to vote Tory or are practicing their attack lines for the next leaflet.Pulpstar said:@HYUFD bold predictions here quite the contrast to the majority of Tories posting here almost soiling themselves about the chances of Corbyn in No 10
0
