politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Never mind Super Tuesday, get ready for Mega March
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Never mind Super Tuesday, get ready for Mega March
The preliminaries are all but over with the first phase of the presidential primaries doing the job assigned them: knocking out (most of) the also-rans and narrowing the field to the serious contenders and the hobby-horseists.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It is now. First first in ages.
I think the republican selection is sorted already. If Trump wins Texas (and I think he will) that is the end.
or (b) people respond differently nationally compared to state-wide
Neither can reel Trump in from anywhere from +11 points to +33 points as the polls show.
vs
I'M WITH HER
If Cruz does lose Texas then the race would likely become a Trump-Rubio showdown. That would probably narrow Trump's lead but it'd still leave him with a healthy margin in the polls and - with the boost of delegates he'd receive in Texas if he won it - a huge lead in delegates.
A CNN poll today for the GOP nomination put Trump on 49% nationally. I suspect that's on the high side but he's almost certainly in the 40s now. Unless something's gone very wrong with the polling, you don't chalk up new record highs when you're on the slide.
The fact that Trump is still rising in the polls might also be a pointer to November. I've been saying for a long time that Trump was underrated in the betting markets for the nomination. I'd say the same now for the White House.
re competitiveness - so you're telling me that the "burden reduction implementation mechanism” is not going to make life easier for SMEs??!! Pah!
Look I think it is less than brilliant but upon examination I think it is ok. He got the biggies - the UK's exemption of no ECU codified in EU law; specific opt-outs from eurozone discrimination; and exemption from the single rulebook.
It costs us about £55m to pay for absent childrens' child benefit so I can live with that.
I would be interested in what those with a genuinely open mind wanted. EEA maintains ironically the one objective he failed in - controlling migration.
What do they want and if no renegotiation would have worked, then why worry about its contents or the spin put on it?
Neither of them was the thread I meant to write though!!
I am forecasting wins for Sanders in Vermont (Hillary might make the 15% cutoff, not sure) and Colorado.
Unfortunately for Bernie those states are totally drowned by VA, TX, MA, MN, GA.
Maybe one day the media might ask all these campaigners why they aren't lobbying the French government to do something. The way they go on, you would think they were in the middle of the nowhere in a war torn country, not a stones throw away from a major housing estate, sport facilities, shops etc.
Also the Guardian wing of the media bashed the hell out of "benefits street" as poverty porn, but don't seem to have an issue calling this place the "Jungle" (which I don't know, seems kinda of racist, especially if we are judging it by Rhodes Must Fall, can't call Harvard academics "Master" standards etc) and spending weeks on end shoving cameras in people faces.
I think you will have better results if you keep control of the estate.
But I don't see why the UK taxpayer should give benefits to non-UK citizens. Really, it seems like a no brainer to me. And I believe we can best achieve that goal outside the EU.
This article summarises the case for the prosecution quite well, I think:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/29/hillarys_victories_mean_painful_legal_choices_for_doj_wh.html
There are no prizes for second place Marco!!
So Labour 1975-79 was right-wing, who knew it..
Not that the prizes will do him any good. I did think he might be a decent VP pick about two months ago. That prize has gone even if he does end up second in the delegate total.
Not sure what your definition of "values" is so no comment there. Wouldn't Trump the economics for me though.
(And of course Labour under Callaghan wasn't right-wing. The IMF policies imposed on the Callaghan government, on the other hand, were).
And you will presumably agree that the negotiations were irrelevant.
Healey cut 2% in one year, that took Osbrown an entire parliament.
https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/704262003574099968
'Benefits Street' was just one more example of Reality Porn.
Better to limit the power of the state than to increase transaction costs.
How many does it take to blow up a skyscraper in London ? or preach hate to our public ?
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary
Currently, Trump = Cruz + Rubio + 6.4%
There is a sense in which people want to feel that the political class is on their side. And they - or a proportion of them - don't feel that. Hence the Trumps and Corbyns and Sanders and the unease about immigration and so forth.
"We are not simply a credit rating or an economy but a history and a culture, a human population rather than a statistical phenomenon."
Politicians would do well, occasionally, to remember this.
45.29% vs 44.86%
45.56% vs 45.31%
43.20% vs 43.97%
42.59% vs 44.05%
That would argue that Thatcher indeed moved faster to get spending under control.
Those who lived through the late seventies and early 80s remember how quickly unemployment exploded from around 440k to 1.5m (5.2%-14.8% by 1986). That probably accounted for all the Thatcher increases in GDP spending.
You will forgive me if I side step your rhetorical trap of asking me why I am objecting to something that is irrelevant.
They are irrelevant for me personally, they are however a device which the government is using to garner support, they therefore have value to the extent that the strategy works. If using the negotiations yields a Remain vote, were not using them would have yielded a Leave (which seems a likely outcome), and they are subsequently disemboweled, the public will have been sold a pup, and entitled to ask for their money back, something I can't see the PM allowing.
You appear to be adopting the approach of a bank manager that feels adding doors to his safe is a little expensive as he hasn't been robbed yet.
The first duty of government is the protection of its citizens
When Cameron took over all the talk was about a double dip recession so to dismiss the recession as two year old history is shall we say interesting.
"I want must get" seems to be the mantra.
Hillary will find Trump almost impossible to handle and he can reach and enthuse parts of the electorate who have not even thought about the republicans for a long time.
@DPJHodges: If Out want people to vote for Brexit they're going to have to explain what it looks like. Not what it doesn't look like.
+1 PBP
+1 IND
+1 G
+1 LAB
0 SF
-2 FG
-2 FF
So, not alot of difference from multi member FPTP.
Brown spent 18 months lowering VAT and 'bringing forward' spending to prop up the economy (and his election chances). If you think the economy 2 years after the crash was in anything other than a nadir then you are a snake oil salesman who will get no custom from me.
At the time of Lee Rigby it was revealed that the security services had the capability to put full time surveillance on about 400 people. The people that murdered him had come to their notice, but they did not have the resources to watch everyone. How many people are arriving now from countries that don't like us very much ? How many returning jihadis ? They will never have enough resources to come even close.
That's why we don't have a free travel area with such a group.
Some people really are idiots aren't they.
Make it £5000 and I suspect much of the current problem would go away. And if it doesn't, you make it £10000
The final advantage is that - unlike all the micromanaging solutions - it needs no bureaucracy and (as you say) if we still feel we're getting too many people we can raise the cost the next year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain#Markov_text_generators
I grant that in certain fields greater emphasis has to be on intelligence, but even in such fields, as bioterrorism, the aim surely should be on making the effects of any attack no worse than, say, a train crash than on trying to prevent all incidents.
Now if we just had a work permit charge, scaled by types or a % of salary.
@jennirsl: .@NicolaSturgeon: Disastrous for UK to vote No. If do, of course Scots may have new ref.
'I think it is not unreasonable to ask non-citizens to pay an annual Services Charge of - say - £2,000. '
Excellent idea.
What if the UK government passed a law that benefits were only payable to UK & EU nationals if their families had a record of at least 5 years of tax contributions ?
The EU discrimination argument goes out the window ?
What I strongly object to is the number of politicians we have imposing their will on us. Especially in the case of the EU when we can't do anything to boot them out.
What's needed is a global Yellow Pages where people selling things can contact people who might want to buy them. Politicians can fuck off out of the way, none of them have the slightest knowledge of how trade works. People buy things they want or need, they don't need idiots with stupid titles telling them what those things are.
One rate for single individuals, another for those bringing family.