politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How opinion on the referendum is going in first week after

ComRes PHONE lead of 12. Based on the following underlying data and assumptions:-

1. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting. This does not look to be a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is about 3 times that in the 18-25 range.

2. In the Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. Out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote.
Also the certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?

What a load of nonsense in the polls! Tea leaves read by a Chimpanzee would be as useful!

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

What I take from these polls is that nobody really knows. If you had a speedometer that told you whether you were within the speed limit or not, and it varied from 19kph over to 4kph under, you'd throw it out of the window. Best approach is to take the within-poll change, not the between-poll average: so plot the change in poll A from this month to last month, poll B ditto, etc, NOT "the average of poll A,B,C is". From the former I conclude that LEAVE is increasing and REMAIN decreasing, with this trend lessened since the announcement but not reversed. From the latter I can conclude nothing useful.

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

Or some of the pollsters. Sone could be vindicated.

Great Osborne bet. Without a big Remain win - which looks hugely unlikely - George is effectively toast. He was being lauded as a hero on here and elsewhere just a few months ago. What a fall it would be.

viewcode said:

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

What I take from these polls is that nobody really knows. If you had a speedometer that told you whether you were within the speed limit or not, and it varied from 19kph over to 4kph under, you'd throw it out of the window. Best approach is to take the within-poll change, not the between-poll average: so plot the change in poll A from this month to last month, poll B ditto, etc, NOT "the average of poll A,B,C is". From the former I conclude that LEAVE is increasing and REMAIN decreasing, with this trend lessened since the announcement but not reversed. From the latter I can conclude nothing useful.

It's a fair approach, but given that somebody (everybody?) is hopelessly adrift, there's still only a moderate level of confidence in the direction of travel.

Philip_Thompson said:

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

Or some of the pollsters. Sone could be vindicated.

Fair enough. I was trying to make the point that the wider polling industry still wasn't giving us confidence that it knows what it is doing. But yes, ORB might be spot on... ;-)

MarqueeMark said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

Or some of the pollsters. Sone could be vindicated.

Fair enough. I was trying to make the point that the wider polling industry still wasn't giving us confidence that it knows what it is doing. But yes, ORB might be spot on... ;-)

Godsdammit, if only we knew which ones were right and which wrong...

Hike - Thanks for the heads-up on Geo Osborne ceasing to be Chancellor this year. I've followed you in with Hills at 10/1 and watched on screen as they immediately chopped back their price to 7/1!
As Britain's biggest bookie, they really do come across as a frit, tin-pot operation at times ..... goodness me, can't they lay a few quid at 10/1 without donning the brown trousers? Had I staked £100 then maybe. Perhaps they sensed that the word had just gone out on PB.com.
Btw, I also had a small saver on him leaving his current post during 2017, also at odds of 10/1. My bet wouldn't have been so small had Hills traders firstly rejected my originally requested stake of £5 ..... I mean how pathetic is that?
Anyway I'm very comfortable with those two bets in combination and will be surprised if one or other doesn't deliver, Osbo's already on borrowed time imho.

DYOR

NickPalmer said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

ComRes PHONE lead of 12. Based on the following underlying data and assumptions:-

1. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting. This does not look to be a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is about 3 times that in the 18-25 range.

2. In the Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. Out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote.
Also the certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?

This reflects the difficulty of predicting future behaviour from past behaviour. On the whole, I agree with you on point 1 - it's possible that there is a huge mobilisation of the young going on, but I think evidence for it is limited, especially in the EU context - but disagree with you on point 2, which seems to me entirely explicable by the very public division in Tory advice to supporters. ......But neither of us actually know. ComRes assumes that people are truthfully indicating whether they intend to vote, and if they take this and then add a layer of adjustment for what we think they'll do, we may be misrepresenting or even double-counting them.

Thanks Nick. What we do know is that the young do not turn out in European elections either. So why are they going to suddenly change for the referendum?

NickPalmer said:

If Corbyn was advising one thing and McDonnell was advising the opposite, Labour voters would be similarly uncertain.

But what are they advising? I haven't seen McDonnell for weeks and Corbyn's lack of enthusiasm for the cause could scarcely be more obvious. In contrast, the king of hi-vis has been popping up everywhere.

viewcode said:

MarqueeMark said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

Or some of the pollsters. Sone could be vindicated.

Fair enough. I was trying to make the point that the wider polling industry still wasn't giving us confidence that it knows what it is doing. But yes, ORB might be spot on... ;-)

Godsdammit, if only we knew which ones were right and which wrong...

IMHO we should be challenging the underlying data and comparing that with past patterns of behaviour. Up to GE15 there was an unwritten rule on here not to challenge the professionalism and assumptions that polling analysis is built on. Since some polling companies seem to be carrying on in the same old way, then this website should challenge them.

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

OllyT said:

Correct but LEAVERS won't engage on that issue they keep maintaining the myth that a LEAVE vote is somehow going to end immigration. I suspect it's not a line that is going to be able to be maintained through to June. The imponderable is what will the LEAVERS who are primarily motivated by immigration do once it dawns on them that what they will actually be getting is very little different to what they have now.

Grumble from the sidelines like has happened for years I suspect.

There is a (small) possibility of a majority of the country being for Leave = EFTA
There is no possibility of Leave = Total Leave IMO. Between the Remain side and the fraction of the Leave side that backs EFTA there is definitely a majority.

Oh the howls of anguish that we’ll hear if Leavce wins and Leavers realise we STILL have free movement.

Almost worth voting Leave to enjoy!

TCPoliticalBetting said:

viewcode said:

MarqueeMark said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MarqueeMark said:

A 19% disparity on an either/or choice is damning of the pollsters....

Or some of the pollsters. Sone could be vindicated.

Fair enough. I was trying to make the point that the wider polling industry still wasn't giving us confidence that it knows what it is doing. But yes, ORB might be spot on... ;-)

Godsdammit, if only we knew which ones were right and which wrong...

IMHO we should be challenging the underlying data and comparing that with past patterns of behaviour. Up to GE15 there was an unwritten rule on here not to challenge the professionalism and assumptions that polling analysis is built on. Since some polling companies seem to be carrying on in the same old way, then this website should challenge them.

Although I note that you only seem to be fisking the polls that show a REMAIN lead, I haven't really got a problem with the approach you describe. Keep going and well done.

Popcorn or do we need a ring side seat?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3466919/Control-freak-Chris-Evans-s-dictatorial-behaviour-Gear-set-forced-new-producer-quit-DIDN-T-want-hire-Matt-Le-Blanc.html

OldKingCole said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

OllyT said:

Correct but LEAVERS won't engage on that issue they keep maintaining the myth that a LEAVE vote is somehow going to end immigration. I suspect it's not a line that is going to be able to be maintained through to June. The imponderable is what will the LEAVERS who are primarily motivated by immigration do once it dawns on them that what they will actually be getting is very little different to what they have now.

Grumble from the sidelines like has happened for years I suspect.

There is a (small) possibility of a majority of the country being for Leave = EFTA
There is no possibility of Leave = Total Leave IMO. Between the Remain side and the fraction of the Leave side that backs EFTA there is definitely a majority.

Oh the howls of anguish that we’ll hear if Leavce wins and Leavers realise we STILL have free movement.

Almost worth voting Leave to enjoy!

People should be given distinct options and the advantages and disadvantages of each option clearly delineated so they can choose wisely. If people vote LEAVE expecting immigration to be restricted to X, and post-LEAVE it is not so restricted, then they have a right to be aggrieved. Reality being what it is, there may be little I can do about this, but it's not the way elections/referenda should work.

I will now get off my high-horse and go back to work...

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Thanks Nick. What we do know is that the young do not turn out in European elections either. So why are they going to suddenly change for the referendum?

It's hard to tell. There will be months of "this is crucial" publicity, which there certainly wasn't for the Euros. I think that if the polls start to suggest that Leave is a real possibility, that will push Remain turnout up - they have a much large "reserve" of people who vaguely support staying in but may not bother, whereas the "Leave" camp is already mobilised. Probably the ideal Leave scenario is polling showing them 6-7% behind based on faulty turnout predictions...

RodCrosby said:

Sounds like Trump is going to simultaneously win the Presidency and smash the GOP...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html

Theodore Roosevelt. Ok, now I go back to work.

NickPalmer said:

They're not getting much coverage, because what they're saying is predictable and un-shocking. They're urging Remain for reasons of worker solidarity and protection of employment rights. For what it's worth, they seem to be broadly echoed by Labour voters in the polls as well. The question is whether Labour voters will turn out.

What I've heard from Cameron, Osborne, Gove, Johnson and Farage hasn't been shocking either. Has it surprised you?

FPT:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

MarqueeMark said:

AlastairMeeks said:

If there is a Leave vote, most Remainians will accept it. If there is a Remain vote, most Leavers will not accept it. That much is already apparent.

I'm calling specious bullshit on that.

Leavers are better at abuse than rational argument. You make Alistair's point for him.

What I object to to is the underlying smugness that Remainers are claiming to be better democrats than Leavers.

Not just better democrats; better people.

Sean Fear is more honest. At least he admits that a referendum defeat would be just a staging post rather than settling the argument and that he sees it as asymmetric.

It can't be anything other than asymmetric. If, say, we had another Border Poll in Northern Ireland, it would probably result in about a 60/40 vote to stay in the UK. But, I'd be very surprised if the SDLP and Sinn Fein stopped campaigning for Irish Unification. Likewise, the SNP will campaign still to leave the UK, despite the vote in 2014.

But, if Irish or Scottish nationalists won, that would be that. What's now the status quo would become a lost cause.

Leave supporters demanded a referendum now. Sinn Fein and SDLP supporters are not particularly looking for one now. If you ask for one and lose, you need to accept the verdict until circumstances change substantially.

Alastair, you're trying very hard to tar all leavers with the same brush.

I have never demanded a referendum, but given the poor hand delivered by the PM and the dreadful abuse of Govt power in the early stages of the campaign, I've become a firm Leaver. I'm also now considering campaigning.

I don't know a single local Tory activist who is campaigning for Remain....many party loyalists are being driven away by the condescension of the leadership.

Norm said:

Sometimes you have to use your sixth sense and when telling for the Tories at the last GE I kind of suspected by 2pm the polls were about to come a cropper. Plus 15 and plus 12 leads for Remain just don't feel right at least right now they don't. By June 23rd they might be. My sense currently is that this is desperately close much as the online polls suggest but with the possibility that those currently saying they need more information before deciding etc playing a key role in the end

I always worry about people insisting this is close as it seems the default assumption for almost any election even if everything points otherwise. Eg 2012 Presidential Election, it was patently obvious Obama would be re-elected but every commentary was about "too close to call".

How does someone get to this position at the Times?
Has he not heard of the £11bn a year net that we pay in? That would at £50k each pay for 220,000 a year... Is that no enough civil servants to sort it out for 2 years? After that we make massive savings.

Simon Nixon ‏@Simon_Nixon 2m2 minutes ago
Brexit would bring a daunting To Do list http://on.ft.com/1LLCJra
> Brexiteers should explain how they will pay for all the extra bureaucracy

Roger said:

john_zims said:

Interesting how the arguments of Remain have changed over the past couple of weeks from Leave won't have any big political hitters,trade,Farage & national security etc.to if Leave wins immigration will remain unchanged because we will join EFTA.

The 'Remain' argument that works for me is 'The One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' scenario.

Boris in Downing Street and Trump in the White House.

Trump has squat to do with Brexit.

Osborne could be Foreign Secretary.

Farage is a plant for remain, only explanation.


@elashton: Just had chat with Nigel in pub. Is he disappointed that Douglas didn't show up at venue? "Douglas who?"

On @DouglasCarswell, Farage goes on: "He can do what he likes. I don't care." Pointedly says that UKIP's MEPs are "up for the fight".

Philip_Thompson said:

Roger said:

john_zims said:

Interesting how the arguments of Remain have changed over the past couple of weeks from Leave won't have any big political hitters,trade,Farage & national security etc.to if Leave wins immigration will remain unchanged because we will join EFTA.

The 'Remain' argument that works for me is 'The One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' scenario.

Boris in Downing Street and Trump in the White House.

Trump has squat to do with Brexit.

Of course but if ever we needed a sane Prime Minister backed up by our allies in the EU it's when we have a loose trident in the White House.

Roger said:

john_zims said:

Interesting how the arguments of Remain have changed over the past couple of weeks from Leave won't have any big political hitters,trade,Farage & national security etc.to if Leave wins immigration will remain unchanged because we will join EFTA.

The 'Remain' argument that works for me is 'The One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' scenario.

Boris in Downing Street and Trump in the White House.

So you sacrifice 40 years in the future for 2 years in the present? Bad deal!

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Farage is a plant for remain, only explanation.


@elashton: Just had chat with Nigel in pub. Is he disappointed that Douglas didn't show up at venue? "Douglas who?"

On @DouglasCarswell, Farage goes on: "He can do what he likes. I don't care." Pointedly says that UKIP's MEPs are "up for the fight".

I fear that you're right.
He defo needs to be locked in a wood shed for the duration.

I've been saying for nearly a year if Leave wants to win, they should send Farage to the North Pole and tell him not to return until he has found a penguin.

flightpath01 said:

NickPalmer said:

initforthemoney said:

NickPalmer said:

If Corbyn was advising one thing and McDonnell was advising the opposite, Labour voters would be similarly uncertain.

But what are they advising? I haven't seen McDonnell for weeks and Corbyn's lack of enthusiasm for the cause could scarcely be more obvious. In contrast, the king of hi-vis has been popping up everywhere.

They're not getting much coverage, because what they're saying is predictable and un-shocking. They're urging Remain for reasons of worker solidarity and protection of employment rights. For what it's worth, they seem to be broadly echoed by Labour voters in the polls as well. The question is whether Labour voters will turn out.

The only party that seems to want to embarrass itself in public is the tory party and so the media are more than happy to follow it around. It makes for good copy.
Dumb leavers are happy to keep it stirred. If they carry on afterwards then Corbynites will be over the moon. And of course Farage is delighted to have such useful idiots around.

The flip side of that is the public see a Labour Party that has no interest in the big issue of day, instead happy to talk about nuclear submarines without nukes and banning Redskins..... Why should they bother voting for them again if they really don't appear to care?

RodCrosby said:

Sounds like Trump is going to simultaneously win the Presidency and smash the GOP...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html

To be a contrarian, there is a view that a Republican Party split between the blandness of Romney and the bat-shit craziness of the Tea Party needed a complete distraction in the shape of Trump, to have any chance of surviving. Either Trump becomes President, in which case the previous power structure in the party will be dismantled, but under a winner and not a loser. Or Trump screws up - in which case, the various factions can rally together under the flag of "Never again..." but with years rather than days to work out how.

MonikerDiCanio said:

Roger said:

john_zims said:

Interesting how the arguments of Remain have changed over the past couple of weeks from Leave won't have any big political hitters,trade,Farage & national security etc.to if Leave wins immigration will remain unchanged because we will join EFTA.

The 'Remain' argument that works for me is 'The One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' scenario.

Boris in Downing Street and Trump in the White House.

Freed from Nurse Ratched.

And Boris finally says something:

"Juicy Fruit...."

MarqueeMark said:

RodCrosby said:

Sounds like Trump is going to simultaneously win the Presidency and smash the GOP...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html

To be a contrarian, there is a view that a Republican Party split between the blandness of Romney and the bat-shit craziness of the Tea Party needed a complete distraction in the shape of Trump, to have any chance of surviving. Either Trump becomes President, in which case the previous power structure in the party will be dismantled, but under a winner and not a loser. Or Trump screws up - in which case, the various factions can rally together under the flag of "Never again..." but with years rather than days to work out how.

That's a top post. I have felt something somewhat similar but been unable to express it so clearly.

Something I pointed out to someone yesterday, who said Trump was a joke and there's no way he could be president: he's completely OTT (and we mostly get to hear his various foreign pronouncements, which make him appear even more OTT), but without Trump's "distinctive" qualities, how could someone with his positions on e.g. abortion and healthcare have performed so well among the GOP base?

Indigo said:

MyBurningEars said:

Something I pointed out to someone yesterday, who said Trump was a joke and there's no way he could be president: he's completely OTT (and we mostly get to hear his various foreign pronouncements, which make him appear even more OTT), but without Trump's "distinctive" qualities, how could someone with his positions on e.g. abortion and healthcare have performed so well among the GOP base?

I get the impression that Republican voters are so desperate for an outsider (61% wanted someone from outside politics) who isn't going to mouth the same old verities to get into office and then sell them out in the first week to whoever funded their campaign, that they really are prepared to give a massive amount of benefit of the doubt to achieve it. I dont think its Trump's views that will get him elected, I think it will be Trump's independence.

Absolutely. It is two things, primarily:

1. His independence from vested interests (other than his own)
2. His willingness not to be PC and say it as it is (or as Trump imagines it to be).

There is a presumption that much of what he says is performance, and that he'll actually be competent at the bits of government they care about - i.e. efficient delivery of a limited programme of domestic policies. There is also a suspicion that he is actually, for all his campaign rhetoric, centrist on most of the big defining issues (i.e. the issues that separate the US parties - abortion, healthcare, gun control, race, budget).

For the most part, insulting Johnny Foreigner adds to his appeal.

MTimT said:

Indigo said:

MyBurningEars said:

Something I pointed out to someone yesterday, who said Trump was a joke and there's no way he could be president: he's completely OTT (and we mostly get to hear his various foreign pronouncements, which make him appear even more OTT), but without Trump's "distinctive" qualities, how could someone with his positions on e.g. abortion and healthcare have performed so well among the GOP base?

I get the impression that Republican voters are so desperate for an outsider (61% wanted someone from outside politics) who isn't going to mouth the same old verities to get into office and then sell them out in the first week to whoever funded their campaign, that they really are prepared to give a massive amount of benefit of the doubt to achieve it. I dont think its Trump's views that will get him elected, I think it will be Trump's independence.

Absolutely. It is two things, primarily:

1. His independence from vested interests (other than his own)
2. His willingness not to be PC and say it as it is (or as Trump imagines it to be).

There is a presumption that much of what he says is performance, and that he'll actually be competent at the bits of government they care about - i.e. efficient delivery of a limited programme of domestic policies. There is also a suspicion that he is actually, for all his campaign rhetoric, centrist on most of the big defining issues (i.e. the issues that separate the US parties - abortion, healthcare, gun control, race, budget).

For the most part, insulting Johnny Foreigner adds to his appeal.

Tim, do you think is there any effect that States such as Michigan and Wisconsin, at the opposite end of the country, are more attracted to Trump's Mexican wall as a panacea to all America's woes? I am certainly thinking those two states in particular could have a big impact this time around.

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Roger said:

john_zims said:

Interesting how the arguments of Remain have changed over the past couple of weeks from Leave won't have any big political hitters,trade,Farage & national security etc.to if Leave wins immigration will remain unchanged because we will join EFTA.

The 'Remain' argument that works for me is 'The One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' scenario.

Boris in Downing Street and Trump in the White House.

Trump has squat to do with Brexit.

We'd be negotiating a trade deal with him, wouldn't we?

Considering Trump opposes TTIP and TPP we'd have more luck doing a trade deal on our own if he's the President.

Speedy said:

They have to get to terms that even their own voters like to have healthcare ...

Shorthand like this is how problems in political analysis arise. The GOP have never been against healthcare. They have been against the Affordable Healthcare Act. And rightly so in my opinion for philosophical, cost and quality of care reasons.

It was GW Bush who expanded Medicaid and Medicare. It was Romney who tried the idea of the individual mandate, which failed in his state before Obama foisted it upon the nation as a whole. None of these were particularly brilliant successes for healthcare in the US, but it shows that the GOP cares about, thinks about, and innovates in relation to healthcare.

Innocent_Abroad said:

Speedy said:

RodCrosby said:

Sounds like Trump is going to simultaneously win the Presidency and smash the GOP...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html

"At a meeting of Republican governors the next morning, Paul R. LePage of Maine called for action. Seated at a long boardroom table at the Willard Hotel, he erupted in frustration over the state of the 2016 race, saying Mr. Trump’s nomination would deeply wound the Republican Party. Mr. LePage urged the governors to draft an open letter “to the people,” disavowing Mr. Trump and his divisive brand of politics."

"On Friday, a few hours after Mr. Christie endorsed him, Mr. Trump collected support from a second governor, who in a radio interview said Mr. Trump could be “one of the greatest presidents.”

That governor was Paul LePage."

That says it all.

Anyway the transformation from a conservative to a nationalist party will be painful but more successful electorally for the GOP.
They have to get to terms that even their own voters like to have healthcare, basic services and a government to manage them and protect them, they can't go on blasting about Reagan and abolishing all taxes and government including schools and hospitals.

If only they all read the libertarians on here

Ah so we can add Libertarianism to the long list of subjects you know sweet FA about. Not surprising given your general level of ignorance.

MarqueeMark said:

Tim, do you think is there any effect that States such as Michigan and Wisconsin, at the opposite end of the country, are more attracted to Trump's Mexican wall as a panacea to all America's woes? I am certainly thinking those two states in particular could have a big impact this time around.

I am probably the wrong person to ask about this as I am very pro controlled immigration, amnesty and worker visa policies. It is clear in the DC metro area (locally called the DMV - District, Maryland, Virginia) that there is ambivalence towards illegal immigrants. Too much of the farming, construction, landscaping, housekeeping and horse industries would collapse without them, and virtually everyone in the middle class up directly or indirectly employs an illegal alien.

The Rust Belt tends to be way more Union territory than the DMV. The disaffected union blue collars are one of the larger groups flocking to the Trump message, so your thought that he would do well there has a ring of truth to it.

But I don't think UK observers get how big an issue the PC thing is - how outraged many parts of the non-liberal (US usage) population has become at the whole PC thing. That is 60-65% of the population and crosses pretty much all demographic groups (save perhaps Blacks and, to a lesser extent, Latinos), so the idea that Hillary would be a slam dunk against Trump is extraordinary to me.

MarqueeMark said:

MTimT said:

Indigo said:

MyBurningEars said:

Something I pointed out to someone yesterday, who said Trump was a joke and there's no way he could be president: he's completely OTT (and we mostly get to hear his various foreign pronouncements, which make him appear even more OTT), but without Trump's "distinctive" qualities, how could someone with his positions on e.g. abortion and healthcare have performed so well among the GOP base?

I get the impression that Republican voters are so desperate for an outsider (61% wanted someone from outside politics) who isn't going to mouth the same old verities to get into office and then sell them out in the first week to whoever funded their campaign, that they really are prepared to give a massive amount of benefit of the doubt to achieve it. I dont think its Trump's views that will get him elected, I think it will be Trump's independence.

Absolutely. It is two things, primarily:

1. His independence from vested interests (other than his own)
2. His willingness not to be PC and say it as it is (or as Trump imagines it to be).

There is a presumption that much of what he says is performance, and that he'll actually be competent at the bits of government they care about - i.e. efficient delivery of a limited programme of domestic policies. There is also a suspicion that he is actually, for all his campaign rhetoric, centrist on most of the big defining issues (i.e. the issues that separate the US parties - abortion, healthcare, gun control, race, budget).

For the most part, insulting Johnny Foreigner adds to his appeal.

Tim, do you think is there any effect that States such as Michigan and Wisconsin, at the opposite end of the country, are more attracted to Trump's Mexican wall as a panacea to all America's woes? I am certainly thinking those two states in particular could have a big impact this time around.

Forget about Wisconsin, Scott Walker has made it very difficult for any republican to win that state, substitute it for Ohio.

MarqueeMark said:

Stark_Dawning said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Farage is a plant for remain, only explanation.


@elashton: Just had chat with Nigel in pub. Is he disappointed that Douglas didn't show up at venue? "Douglas who?"

On @DouglasCarswell, Farage goes on: "He can do what he likes. I don't care." Pointedly says that UKIP's MEPs are "up for the fight".

I'm wondering if Farage is suffering from a kind of buyers' remorse. The thing he's demanded for most of his life is finally here, yet it doesn't feel as good as he thought it would and he isn't getting any credit for it. And if Leave actually triumphs he'd have to get himself a proper job. For many, the campaign for Out will transpire to have been far more enjoyable than Out itself. Of course, regardless of the result, they've still got Cameron and Osborne to kick around, but after that...?

Farage is like the Viz character Spoilt Bastard - an ungrateful and vicious-tongued boy who manipulates his weak-willed party into satisfying his hollow and selfish desires, usually with serious health-threatening consequences for his party.

I think Farage expected to be leading the Leave campaign, with just a couple of cabinet ministers supporting Leave, and not overshadowing him. Now, it turns out that he's only the Fourth or Fifth most important figure in the campaign.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Speedy said:

RodCrosby said:

Sounds like Trump is going to simultaneously win the Presidency and smash the GOP...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html

"At a meeting of Republican governors the next morning, Paul R. LePage of Maine called for action. Seated at a long boardroom table at the Willard Hotel, he erupted in frustration over the state of the 2016 race, saying Mr. Trump’s nomination would deeply wound the Republican Party. Mr. LePage urged the governors to draft an open letter “to the people,” disavowing Mr. Trump and his divisive brand of politics."

"On Friday, a few hours after Mr. Christie endorsed him, Mr. Trump collected support from a second governor, who in a radio interview said Mr. Trump could be “one of the greatest presidents.”

That governor was Paul LePage."

That says it all.

Anyway the transformation from a conservative to a nationalist party will be painful but more successful electorally for the GOP.
They have to get to terms that even their own voters like to have healthcare, basic services and a government to manage them and protect them, they can't go on blasting about Reagan and abolishing all taxes and government including schools and hospitals.

If only they all read the libertarians on here

Ah so we can add Libertarianism to the long list of subjects you know sweet FA about. Not surprising given your general level of ignorance.

You can do better than that. I shall try to give the L-word a capital letter next time.

MTimT said:

MarqueeMark said:

Tim, do you think is there any effect that States such as Michigan and Wisconsin, at the opposite end of the country, are more attracted to Trump's Mexican wall as a panacea to all America's woes? I am certainly thinking those two states in particular could have a big impact this time around.

I am probably the wrong person to ask about this as I am very pro controlled immigration, amnesty and worker visa policies. It is clear in the DC metro area (locally called the DMV - District, Maryland, Virginia) that there is ambivalence towards illegal immigrants. Too much of the farming, construction, landscaping, housekeeping and horse industries would collapse without them, and virtually everyone in the middle class up directly or indirectly employs an illegal alien.

The Rust Belt tends to be way more Union territory than the DMV. The disaffected union blue collars are one of the larger groups flocking to the Trump message, so your thought that he would do well there has a ring of truth to it.

But I don't think UK observers get how big an issue the PC thing is - how outraged many parts of the non-liberal (US usage) population has become at the whole PC thing. That is 60-65% of the population and crosses pretty much all demographic groups (save perhaps Blacks and, to a lesser extent, Latinos), so the idea that Hillary would be a slam dunk against Trump is extraordinary to me.

Appreciated.

flightpath01 said:

Indigo said:

flightpath01 said:

NickPalmer said:

initforthemoney said:

NickPalmer said:

If Corbyn was advising one thing and McDonnell was advising the opposite, Labour voters would be similarly uncertain.

But what are they advising? I haven't seen McDonnell for weeks and Corbyn's lack of enthusiasm for the cause could scarcely be more obvious. In contrast, the king of hi-vis has been popping up everywhere.

They're not getting much coverage, because what they're saying is predictable and un-shocking. They're urging Remain for reasons of worker solidarity and protection of employment rights. For what it's worth, they seem to be broadly echoed by Labour voters in the polls as well. The question is whether Labour voters will turn out.

The only party that seems to want to embarrass itself in public is the tory party and so the media are more than happy to follow it around. It makes for good copy.
Dumb leavers are happy to keep it stirred. If they carry on afterwards then Corbynites will be over the moon. And of course Farage is delighted to have such useful idiots around.

Oh give it a rest. I suppose the "dumb remainers" are any better ? There are two sides to this argument, supported broadly by half the population each. It is an issue which might affect the country for a decade or more, don't you think it needs a proper hearing ? Clearly not.

No thanks I think I'll continue. There is no real difference in staying in or leaving and joining EEA like Norway. The dumb leavers in the tory party - like Gove and Boris who ought to know better - want to parade this lack of difference as a nice way to show the tories as split after years of hard work cornering the centre ground.
Scummy barstewards like Farage and Galloway peddling their different bigotries know a bunch of dummies when they see them.

I think that there are obvious differences between EEA/EFTA membership and EU membership as Richard Tyndall and others have explained ad nauseam.

As to the rest, I think this vote is potentially very good for the Conservatives. If Leave wins they can absorb part of the UKIP vote and be polling in the mid 40's.

Sean_F said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stark_Dawning said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Farage is a plant for remain, only explanation.


@elashton: Just had chat with Nigel in pub. Is he disappointed that Douglas didn't show up at venue? "Douglas who?"

On @DouglasCarswell, Farage goes on: "He can do what he likes. I don't care." Pointedly says that UKIP's MEPs are "up for the fight".

I'm wondering if Farage is suffering from a kind of buyers' remorse. The thing he's demanded for most of his life is finally here, yet it doesn't feel as good as he thought it would and he isn't getting any credit for it. And if Leave actually triumphs he'd have to get himself a proper job. For many, the campaign for Out will transpire to have been far more enjoyable than Out itself. Of course, regardless of the result, they've still got Cameron and Osborne to kick around, but after that...?

Farage is like the Viz character Spoilt Bastard - an ungrateful and vicious-tongued boy who manipulates his weak-willed party into satisfying his hollow and selfish desires, usually with serious health-threatening consequences for his party.

I think Farage expected to be leading the Leave campaign, with just a couple of cabinet ministers supporting Leave, and not overshadowing him. Now, it turns out that he's only the Fourth or Fifth most important figure in the campaign.

Which is an unexpectedly good turn of events for Leave.

MTimT said:

MarqueeMark said:

Tim, do you think is there any effect that States such as Michigan and Wisconsin, at the opposite end of the country, are more attracted to Trump's Mexican wall as a panacea to all America's woes? I am certainly thinking those two states in particular could have a big impact this time around.

I am probably the wrong person to ask about this as I am very pro controlled immigration, amnesty and worker visa policies. It is clear in the DC metro area (locally called the DMV - District, Maryland, Virginia) that there is ambivalence towards illegal immigrants. Too much of the farming, construction, landscaping, housekeeping and horse industries would collapse without them, and virtually everyone in the middle class up directly or indirectly employs an illegal alien.

The Rust Belt tends to be way more Union territory than the DMV. The disaffected union blue collars are one of the larger groups flocking to the Trump message, so your thought that he would do well there has a ring of truth to it.

But I don't think UK observers get how big an issue the PC thing is - how outraged many parts of the non-liberal (US usage) population has become at the whole PC thing. That is 60-65% of the population and crosses pretty much all demographic groups (save perhaps Blacks and, to a lesser extent, Latinos), so the idea that Hillary would be a slam dunk against Trump is extraordinary to me.

Thanks for that, Mr. T., very interesting. I do not understand US politics, but I do know that there is a tendency in the UK to look at them as we do our own. A mistake in my view but one that can create profitable betting opportunities (if one is prepared to put aside one's own prejudices and listen).

HurstLlama said:

NickPalmer said:

MTimT said:

I think your analysis on point 2, Nick, is a load of crock. This is an issue that is only passionately discussed in the Tory party. To argue that there are divisions would lower the vote, when those divisions arise from passionately held positions, is counter-intuitive to say the least.

Well, I don't know (nor do you!) - we're looking at a poll and speculating. But while I think you're right with respect to party activists, if you're John Smith in Surrey, who always votes Tory but doesn't follow politics closely, it'd be understandable if you felt confused about what the party would like you to do, and somewhat inclined to sit it out.
...

Well I can only talk about the people who have always voted Conservative that I know in darkest Sussex and I can assure you that none of them are confused at all. They know exactly what the Party wants them to do and they will not be doing it.

Nicely put!