First.

FPT:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: apparently Hamilton's attacked Schumacher:
https://twitter.com/JunaidSamodien_/status/661155711527854080

Not classy.

He's right though. Schumacher often exhibited a reckless ruthlessness on track that veered into hideousness (witness Hill and Villeneuve). But that was just on track. If the rumours are true, then his real mastery was in getting total dominance over the teams he was driving for, including both sides of the garage. At least until he (re)joined Mercedes and drove for them in F1.

Hamilton's just not in the same league when it comes to mastery of the team.

On the other hand, has Hamilton won a championship when not driving the best car, as Schumacher arguably did with Benetton?

Yes in 2008, Ferrari had the better car.

Hamilton's team mate finished seventh that season

OK, fair point.

Schumacher was still a far better driver at his peak than Hamilton is. His ability in the wet in particular was so far ahead of the field as to be absurd, and I'm sure I remember one race where he finished on the podium despite only having fifth gear?

I think it was Spain 94 when Schumacher nursed the car home with limited gears. Undoubtedly Schumacher is one of the greatest of all time, but it's always difficult to compare drivers of different eras. I am fairly confident, however, that Hamilton is a superior to driver to Fernando Alonso as we got to see them in the same car at the same time.

Edit: Trump being usurped was supposed to happen. But not by Carson, right?

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Carson has a degree from Yale and was a neurosurgeon, Corbyn has no degree and has been a lifelong political hack. Having said that Trump still leads in New Hampshire and I still think he is more likely to be nominee than Carson, he certainly has the money to take him through the campaign

What a depressing thought if it ends up with either Trump or Carson vs Clinton or Sanders.

tlg86 said:

FPT:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: apparently Hamilton's attacked Schumacher:
https://twitter.com/JunaidSamodien_/status/661155711527854080

Not classy.

He's right though. Schumacher often exhibited a reckless ruthlessness on track that veered into hideousness (witness Hill and Villeneuve). But that was just on track. If the rumours are true, then his real mastery was in getting total dominance over the teams he was driving for, including both sides of the garage. At least until he (re)joined Mercedes and drove for them in F1.

Hamilton's just not in the same league when it comes to mastery of the team.

On the other hand, has Hamilton won a championship when not driving the best car, as Schumacher arguably did with Benetton?

Yes in 2008, Ferrari had the better car.

Hamilton's team mate finished seventh that season

OK, fair point.

Schumacher was still a far better driver at his peak than Hamilton is. His ability in the wet in particular was so far ahead of the field as to be absurd, and I'm sure I remember one race where he finished on the podium despite only having fifth gear?

I think it was Spain 94 when Schumacher nursed the car home with limited gears. Undoubtedly Schumacher is one of the greatest of all time, but it's always difficult to compare drivers of different eras. I am fairly confident, however, that Hamilton is a superior to driver to Fernando Alonso as we got to see them in the same car at the same time.

Edit: Trump being usurped was supposed to happen. But not by Carson, right?

I think it was more recent than that: mid-2000s in his Ferrari years.

Edit: From a quick Google, it seems I'm wrong.

isam said:

nigel4england said:

"Bayern score 5 goals on average per home game. Glad we made them look very average this evening #Arsenal #bbcfootball"

From an Arsenal fan forum.

Played them 3 times in the last 4 seasons at Allianz Arena

W1 D1 L1

Not really all that bad

Tonight though was certainly one way traffic. I watched the first half (properly) and it was clear after 25-30 minutes it was just a matter of how many Bayern were going to rack up.

I wonder whether anyone has a 50/1 bet on Carson becoming POTUS?

AndyJS said:

I wonder whether anyone has a 50/1 bet on Carson becoming POTUS?

do you?

HYUFD said:

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Carson has a degree from Yale and was a neurosurgeon, Corbyn has no degree and has been a lifelong political hack. Having said that Trump still leads in New Hampshire and I still think he is more likely to be nominee than Carson, he certainly has the money to take him through the campaign

Carson came from fairly modest background, via Yale to neurosurgery at John Hopkins. That is not an average medical career. He may be bonkers, but certainly not thick. Neurosurgeons are good at making decisions under pressure. He cannot do sums but I can see why he polls well.

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Now is probably the ideal time to lay Carson. I just don't see the appeal. Yes, the religious-conservative thing plays well to a certain audience, and not a small one, but others can play those cards too the inexperience and inarticulacy are serious drawbacks. Now he's up in front he's there to be shot at, and three months is a long time to maintain a front-running position.

Interesting that Trump's support looks pretty steady, as you say, at around 25%. His polling is somewhat reminiscent of Romney's last time, which hovered at around that kind of score while one bubble candidate after another challenged and was seen off. A quarter of the vote in a field this size is good going and there's scope to go higher as other candidates drop out.

"Russia's Syria force grows to 4,000, U.S. officials say"

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/04/us-mideast-crisis-russia-syria-idUSKCN0ST2G020151104#7AKkJgZExGDZ223K.97

david_herdson said:

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Now is probably the ideal time to lay Carson. I just don't see the appeal. Yes, the religious-conservative thing plays well to a certain audience, and not a small one, but others can play those cards too the inexperience and inarticulacy are serious drawbacks. Now he's up in front he's there to be shot at, and three months is a long time to maintain a front-running position.

Interesting that Trump's support looks pretty steady, as you say, at around 25%. His polling is somewhat reminiscent of Romney's last time, which hovered at around that kind of score while one bubble candidate after another challenged and was seen off. A quarter of the vote in a field this size is good going and there's scope to go higher as other candidates drop out.

Fiorina took Trump's vote and didn't give it back.

A worrying sign for Trump... I have to say Carson is a hold for me.

He's got his time in the sun; 11s or 12s seem fine with that.

MaxPB said:

Surely that's Arsenal out. Useless.

Not definitely. The danger is Olympiacos don't lose in Munich - then we would be out, but hopefully Munich will take it seriously as they haven't yet won the group. We need to beat Zagreb at home and then win in Athens - by two goals or by one goal scoring at least 3/4 depending on goals difference/goals scored.

Revealed: letters Tom Watson exchanged with DPPs Alison Saunders and Sir Keir Starmer

Mr Watson intervened on behalf of a friend, the wife of a Labour politician, demanding that “no further child protection cases” be given to a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer pending a review into his previous work

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11976154/Revealed-letters-Tom-Watson-exchanged-with-DPPs-Alison-Saunders-and-Sir-Keir-Starmer.html

TheWhiteRabbit said:

david_herdson said:

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Now is probably the ideal time to lay Carson. I just don't see the appeal. Yes, the religious-conservative thing plays well to a certain audience, and not a small one, but others can play those cards too the inexperience and inarticulacy are serious drawbacks. Now he's up in front he's there to be shot at, and three months is a long time to maintain a front-running position.

Interesting that Trump's support looks pretty steady, as you say, at around 25%. His polling is somewhat reminiscent of Romney's last time, which hovered at around that kind of score while one bubble candidate after another challenged and was seen off. A quarter of the vote in a field this size is good going and there's scope to go higher as other candidates drop out.

Fiorina took Trump's vote and didn't give it back.

A worrying sign for Trump... I have to say Carson is a hold for me.

He's got his time in the sun; 11s or 12s seem fine with that.

But after Fiorina took his vote, Trump has still held steady. In retrospect, it looks more like Trump over-performed against his core in September but has not really lost much, rather than that he has an endemic weakness.

But we each get to make our calls!

Anyway, that's me signing off for now. Night all!

FrancisUrquhart said:

Revealed: letters Tom Watson exchanged with DPPs Alison Saunders and Sir Keir Starmer

Mr Watson intervened on behalf of a friend, the wife of a Labour politician, demanding that “no further child protection cases” be given to a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer pending a review into his previous work

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11976154/Revealed-letters-Tom-Watson-exchanged-with-DPPs-Alison-Saunders-and-Sir-Keir-Starmer.html

Is this the same Kier Starmer who is tipped as next leader of the labour party?

If like me you believe that neither Donald Trump nor Ben Carson will stay the course, then who gets their early support?

I suggest that Ted Cruz is well-placed for the firebrand vote that Donald Trump is getting. For that reason I'm not betting against him ( I am betting against Donald Trump).

I'm less clear who gets the devout and sincere vote that Ben Carson is gathering. None of the other candidates seem to have a handle on what's motivating his supporters.

flightpath01 said:

david_herdson said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

david_herdson said:

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Now is probably the ideal time to lay Carson. I just don't see the appeal. Yes, the religious-conservative thing plays well to a certain audience, and not a small one, but others can play those cards too the inexperience and inarticulacy are serious drawbacks. Now he's up in front he's there to be shot at, and three months is a long time to maintain a front-running position.

Interesting that Trump's support looks pretty steady, as you say, at around 25%. His polling is somewhat reminiscent of Romney's last time, which hovered at around that kind of score while one bubble candidate after another challenged and was seen off. A quarter of the vote in a field this size is good going and there's scope to go higher as other candidates drop out.

Fiorina took Trump's vote and didn't give it back.

A worrying sign for Trump... I have to say Carson is a hold for me.

He's got his time in the sun; 11s or 12s seem fine with that.

But after Fiorina took his vote, Trump has still held steady. In retrospect, it looks more like Trump over-performed against his core in September but has not really lost much, rather than that he has an endemic weakness.

But we each get to make our calls!

Anyway, that's me signing off for now. Night all!

Trump has nothing to worry about. He has no interest in becoming President of the United States of America. He is taking the entire country the political system and the media for an enormous ride. Well actually an unholy alliance between the media and Trump are taking everyone else for a ride. They are both in it for the money.
The US political process is being taken for a mug.

Well he may well end up being the GOP nominee and then who knows what will happen, I expect Hillary would win but that is by no means certain

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

Yes it certainly is well worth a read, link posted again below
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/george-galloway-i-ve-always-fancied-being-mayor-and-next-year-i-finally-could-be-a3106411.html

Fox GOP poll just released

Trump – 26% (24)
Carson – 23% (23)
Cruz – 11% 10)
Rubio – 11% (9)
Bush – 4% (8)
Kasich – 4% (1)
Fiorina – 3% (5)
Christie – 2% (1)
Huckabee – 4% (5)
Paul – 4% (3)
Jindal – 0% (1)
Santorum – 0% (0)
Graham – 0% (0)
Pataki – 0% (1)
Gilmore – 0% (0)
Undecided – 5% (7
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2015/11/04/fox-poll-gop-nomination-race-coming-into-focus/

HYUFD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

Yes it certainly is well worth a read, link posted again below
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/george-galloway-i-ve-always-fancied-being-mayor-and-next-year-i-finally-could-be-a3106411.html

Time for me to repost what I put on the previous thread.

Ah yes: a man who by his own admission earns half a million quid a year, has a housekeeper, has bought the lease of a shop in Notting Hill and has been living off the public teat for decades with a pension the rest of us can only dream about claims to know what it is to worry about a job, a house, what the Tube or rent costs. The man is a despicable shit who should never be seen or heard of again.

foxinsoxuk said:

HYUFD said:

NickPalmer said:

Trump seems to have established a core vote of 25%, so the real change is that Carson seems to have decisively broken out of the pack - however strange that seems to us on this side of the pond (he's very religious, very conservative, very inexperienced and rather inarticulate).

He's got a good back story and he seems a nice chap - perhaps as with Corbyn the combination of views agreeable to the selectorate plus pleasantness makes for a winning formula?

Carson has a degree from Yale and was a neurosurgeon, Corbyn has no degree and has been a lifelong political hack. Having said that Trump still leads in New Hampshire and I still think he is more likely to be nominee than Carson, he certainly has the money to take him through the campaign

Carson came from fairly modest background, via Yale to neurosurgery at John Hopkins. That is not an average medical career. He may be bonkers, but certainly not thick. Neurosurgeons are good at making decisions under pressure. He cannot do sums but I can see why he polls well.

Trump has not spent a penny (effectively) on his campaign. His sole purpose is to promote himself. He makes money by promoting and selling his name. The nomination process is a walking billboard for him.
Heaven knows who the pseudo quasi political organisation known as The Republican Party will pick, good luck to them, but it might be nice to think they will select a half sane politician, semi capable of forming a government.
Sadly their nomination process is more reminiscent of Strictly Come Dancing with far too many contestants emulating John Sergeant.

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

That causes a bit of a problem for Jeremy Corbyn. Is he going to disavow George Galloway?

Or Sadiq Khan?

I haven't adjusted properly to the new politics.

antifrank said:

I haven't adjusted properly to the new politics.

More new politics here:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-row-as-john-mcdonnell-attends-activist-rallies-in-moderates-seats-a3106626.html

Richard_Nabavi said:

Cyclefree said:

The man is a despicable shit who should never be seen or heard of again.

Indeed so, but business is business! If he's really going to stand and make an effort, that's could shaft Sadiq Khan.

I want neither Galloway - with his nasty Hamas friends and his divisive identity politics - nor Sadiq Khan - with his nasty Cage friends and his divisive ethnic quotas - anywhere near London. I don't care that they'll tear chunks out of each other. They and Corbyn are all cut from the same cloth: the spiteful maliciousness of identity and class politics where individuals don't matter for their own sake but only to prove how much better one group is than another and how hateful the "other" is.

It's the politics of hate not hope. And London deserves better. Britain deserves better.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

The Times is running a few stories this week defenestrating MacDonnell and his links with some obscure (to me) but nasty founder of the SWP. Galloway is in the same class.
Dopy Corbyn has no class at all.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

The tale about being offered £3000 for his hat said it all. Hopefully Galloway will cost Khan a few votes.

HYUFD said:

Cyclefree said:

HYUFD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Off-topic, but important for London mayoral betting: I'd recommend that anyone who missed the Galloway interview in the Standard (see link posted by HYUFD near the end of the previous thread) should un-miss it. Hard to tell how much is bluster, but he's never been a shy retiring violet; he's gunning for Sadiq Khan and claiming to be the true Corbyn candidate.

Yes it certainly is well worth a read, link posted again below
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/george-galloway-i-ve-always-fancied-being-mayor-and-next-year-i-finally-could-be-a3106411.html

Time for me to repost what I put on the previous thread.

Ah yes: a man who by his own admission earns half a million quid a year, has a housekeeper, has bought the lease of a shop in Notting Hill and has been living off the public teat for decades with a pension the rest of us can only dream about claims to know what it is to worry about a job, a house, what the Tube or rent costs. The man is a despicable shit who should never be seen or heard of again.

Although Galloway seems keen to point out he was born in an attic in Glasgow with one shared outside loo

Galloway will never have said any such thing , he was from Dundee.

Richard_Nabavi said:

@Cyclefree - TBH I think it's very unfair to bracket Sadiq Khan with Galloway, McDonnell and Corbyn.

He has a convicted terrorist - Babar Ahmed - as a friend and has spoken at platforms shared with Cage. He supports ethnic quotas. He thinks our foreign policy should not needlessly inflame Pakistani youths in case they try and blow us up and he was worried that attempts to deal with Islamist infiltration in schools might put Muslims off entering public life, thus implicitly and - to my mind - insultingly equating Muslims with Islamists.

A man who thinks that it is ok to share a platform with Cage is a man who lacks judgment and some basic moral sense.

He may be marginally better than McDonnell on the basis that in the land of the blind the on-eyed man is king but, frankly, all that shows is the appallingly low standards which pertain in today's Labour Party.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Cyclefree said:

The man is a despicable shit who should never be seen or heard of again.

Indeed so, but business is business! If he's really going to stand and make an effort, that's could shaft Sadiq Khan.

Wonder how many of the Three Pound Army might be tempted into action as Georgian footsoldiers.

My guess: low, unless "online footsoldiering" counts. Tweet for your life!

Tremendous explainer as to why Rubio is likely to win (or, at least, why it won't be Carson):

Look at where the Republican Party lives: Only 11 of 54 GOP senators and 26 of 247 GOP representatives hail from Obama-won locales, but there are 1,247 delegates at stake in Obama-won states, compared with just 1,166 in Romney states.

[...]

For example, three delegates are up for grabs in New York’s heavily Latino, Bronx-based 15th District, which cast just 5,315 votes for Romney in 2012. But there are also three delegates at stake in Alabama’s 6th District, which covers Birmingham’s whitest suburbs and gave Romney 233,803 votes. In other words, a GOP primary vote cast in the bluest part of the Bronx could be worth 43 times more than a vote cast in the reddest part of Alabama.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-primary-rules-might-doom-carson-and-cruz/

Tissue_Price said:

Tremendous explainer as to why Rubio is likely to win (or, at least, why it won't be Carson):

Look at where the Republican Party lives: Only 11 of 54 GOP senators and 26 of 247 GOP representatives hail from Obama-won locales, but there are 1,247 delegates at stake in Obama-won states, compared with just 1,166 in Romney states.

[...]

For example, three delegates are up for grabs in New York’s heavily Latino, Bronx-based 15th District, which cast just 5,315 votes for Romney in 2012. But there are also three delegates at stake in Alabama’s 6th District, which covers Birmingham’s whitest suburbs and gave Romney 233,803 votes. In other words, a GOP primary vote cast in the bluest part of the Bronx could be worth 43 times more than a vote cast in the reddest part of Alabama.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-primary-rules-might-doom-carson-and-cruz/

Momentum is still key, if Rubio does not come first or second in Iowa or NH he is over

Tim_B said:

An interesting stat - it's well established in polls that about 2/3 of the populace think the country is headed in the wrong direction under Obama.

Since Obama became POTUS the Democrats have lost a net 14 US Senate seats, 69 US House seats, 12 governorships and 910 state legislature seats.

Same for George W Bush, same for Clinton, same for Bush Snr, same for Reagan, almost all presidents see their party lose state offices and Congressional seats

Obama's approval rating today at 47% is above George W Bush's 32% at this stage of his presidency but below Bill Clinton's 59%, what is the surname of the likely Democratic candidate again?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx

Tissue_Price said:

Tremendous explainer as to why Rubio is likely to win (or, at least, why it won't be Carson):

Look at where the Republican Party lives: Only 11 of 54 GOP senators and 26 of 247 GOP representatives hail from Obama-won locales, but there are 1,247 delegates at stake in Obama-won states, compared with just 1,166 in Romney states.

[...]

For example, three delegates are up for grabs in New York’s heavily Latino, Bronx-based 15th District, which cast just 5,315 votes for Romney in 2012. But there are also three delegates at stake in Alabama’s 6th District, which covers Birmingham’s whitest suburbs and gave Romney 233,803 votes. In other words, a GOP primary vote cast in the bluest part of the Bronx could be worth 43 times more than a vote cast in the reddest part of Alabama.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-primary-rules-might-doom-carson-and-cruz/

I don't quite understand this - for most states, delegates are not apportioned by District votes but by the result of the State-wide count. In 2012, the three delegates in NY15 weren't decided by the 5315 votes cast in that district, but by the nearly 14 million votes that were cast in the state, with the winner taking all of the delegates from all of the districts.

With the Fox poll in, Carson leads Trump by 0.2% on the RCP average, first time Trump loses the lead there in 109 days, however I say that presently their even at around 25% each.
Trump and Carson still have 50% of the votes, double or more the combined second tier of Rubio and Cruz, with Bush crashing at the also-ran candidate levels I can't see how Rubio can move upwards unless the other establishment candidates drop out and give their 2-3% to Rubio, but that has to happen before the primaries start or it will be too late.

For that look at Christie, he won't be on the next debate because he has fallen bellow the polling threshold, he only has 2% though that he can give to Rubio and his gap with Trump and Carson is about 13%. Christie though might be too selfish to drop out before Iowa or N.Hampshire.

As for the others, Kasich has a lean campaign machine and has stacked everything on N.Hampshire, since he polls there around 10% he won't drop out before it, and Bush will still be there as long as he has the money.

My advice is (and it's good advice so far with the GOP race having predicted the rise of Trump and Carson many many months before, and the crash of Bush, Christie, Kasich and Fiorina since the beginning of this race):
1. Forget about what the mainstream media says and think like a UKIP voter (which is the closest equivalent to a Republican voter), who would you choose as your candidate?
2. Think like a stereotypical countryside american that you see on some weird shows (couch potatoes with guns and bibles), who would you choose as your candidate?
3. Look at the early state polls first, the national picture can be misleading since most campaigns throw everything at Iowa and N.H. not nationally, and the early primary results set the theme and the momentum.
4. Having a good resume counts for nothing in the public spotlight, having good acting skills is the key.

In my opinion this is a race between Trump and Carson, or you could say between blue collar workers and evangelicals.
Goodnight.

Case in point as to why you should follow my advice regarding the GOP race:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ben-carson-pyramids

Now here is Carson saying that he doesn't believe aliens build the pyramids because Joseph did to store grain.
Normally this statement would disqualify Carson from european politics at least, but in america and in particular the republican party I wouldn't be surprised if the majority thought that dinosaurs existed at the time of Noah or that the world was created 5000 years ago.
So Carson's position is within conservative american norms.

Speedy said:

Case in point as to why you should follow my advice regarding the GOP race:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ben-carson-pyramids

Now here is Carson saying that he doesn't believe aliens build the pyramids because Joseph did to store grain.
Normally this statement would disqualify Carson from european politics at least, but in america and in particular the republican party I wouldn't be surprised if the majority thought that dinosaurs existed at the time of Noah or that the world was created 5000 years ago.
So Carson's position is within conservative american norms.

This bullshit caricature of the US, particularly republicans shows ignorance alright, the ignorance of so called sophisticates on this side of the Atlantic.

That there is a stronger religious thread in the US than in Western Europe doesn't count for much politically in reality. Look at the last sets of Presidential elections and end candidates competing for the top job. Not one of them could be described as a religious nutbag, not one. If the masses, the majority as you call them, were all fundamentalists then you'd have a religious nutbag in the White House.

You don't and you haven't because the masses are not.

Y0kel said:

Speedy said:

Case in point as to why you should follow my advice regarding the GOP race:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ben-carson-pyramids

Now here is Carson saying that he doesn't believe aliens build the pyramids because Joseph did to store grain.
Normally this statement would disqualify Carson from european politics at least, but in america and in particular the republican party I wouldn't be surprised if the majority thought that dinosaurs existed at the time of Noah or that the world was created 5000 years ago.
So Carson's position is within conservative american norms.

This bullshit caricature of the US, particularly republicans shows ignorance alright, the ignorance of so called sophisticates on this side of the Atlantic.

That there is a stronger religious thread in the US than in Western Europe doesn't count for much politically in reality. Look at the last sets of Presidential elections and end candidates competing for the top job. Not one of them could be described as a religious nutbag, not one. If the masses, the majority as you call them, were all fundamentalists then you'd have a religious nutbag in the White House.

You don't and you haven't because the masses are not.

Well said, Yokel. I've given up taking on the sneering European takes on American society. Where this sense of superiority comes from escapes me. Which country dominates Nobel prizes, modern culture, economics and military? And they are able to do that because they are gun-toting, single-toothed, couch potato, anti-science religious zealots? I think not. But hey, why let that get in the way of pontificating on how stupid Americans are?

Sky News breaking

Russia sends missile systems to Syria "to prevent hijacking of its jets"

Huh? Something does not quite add up in that report from Sky. How does a missile system stop a hijack.... . (Except permanently of course). Mmmmmm.....

Edit- British Government advises against all but essential travel to Egypt.

Moses_ said:

Sky News breaking

Russia sends missile systems to Syria "to prevent hijacking of its jets"

Huh? Something does not quite add up in that report from Sky. How does a missile system stop a hijack.... . (Except permanently of course). Mmmmmm.....

Edit- British Government advises against all but essential travel to Egypt.

Sounds like an excuse to do something they want to do for other reasons.

Moses_ said:

Sky News breaking

Russia sends missile systems to Syria "to prevent hijacking of its jets"

Huh? Something does not quite add up in that report from Sky. How does a missile system stop a hijack.... . (Except permanently of course). Mmmmmm.....

Edit- British Government advises against all but essential travel to Egypt.

Shoot them down before they are technically hijacked?

TheScreamingEagles said:

England's batting = Labour's ground game.

Don't be so mean about Labour's ground game.

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

England's batting = Labour's ground game.

Don't be so mean about Labour's ground game.

With the exception of Cook and Root England's batting is all fart and no follow through.

We're going to get hammered by the Saffers. Dale Steyn versus this team is going to be like Caesar taking on Hannibal.

A proper ass whooping for England/Hannibal

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

England's batting = Labour's ground game.

Don't be so mean about Labour's ground game.

With the exception of Cook and Root England's batting is all fart and no follow through.

We're going to get hammered by the Saffers. Dale Steyn versus this team is going to be like Caesar taking on Hannibal.

A proper ass whooping for England/Hannibal

24 hours in the life of an England cricket fan - this time yesterday I was royally peeved off that an inconveniently rescheduled meeting meant I couldn't go to the final day. Well I'm off to work now and don't give a crap that I'm not at the cricket!!