Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast

SystemSystem Posts: 11,020
edited August 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast

On this week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast we continue the new format of the show where each guest picks a polling or elections topic to talk about and the group discuss it.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • Options
    First...until DQed
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Scott_P said:

    @afneil: Nick Cohen in The Spectator.
    Long and detailed read
    Why you shouldn’t vote for Jeremy Corbyn https://t.co/OGZvQQDb0G

    Leaving aside the obvious joke that the reason you shouldn't vote for Jeremy Corbyn doesn't need to be a long article, just put up his name, it's useful to get a pretty comprehensive list of most of the key criticisms. However...

    It starts on what I find to be a slightly flawed and overly optimistic premise, common in politics, that too many of his supporters don't know these things('What I discovered was that [Thoughtful, moderately Left-Wing Corbyn supporters] knew almost no facts about him or his fellow travellers) and, implicitly, can therefore be woken up if only they realise.

    The problems being:

    a) All those criticisms have been widely circulated, some well before he became leader. If those 'thoughtful moderate' types really are not aware of them by now, with non-Corbynites and Tories blaring them out constantly for over a year, then they have avoided those point by choice, steering away from them, since as Corbyn supporters they are explicitly more politically inclined than most people, and the target for that information, and yet still missed it.
    b) Even if they become aware of those facts, there's no guarantee it would bother them. Yes, some would, we've seen the previously loyal turn coup plotter over some of them, but witness how many, upon discovering he has done something from that list, then defend it vociferously or use distraction tactics. It's tribalism at work, and no end of people defend near every one of those negative points.

    It'd be nice to think if only people are told fact x they will realise they are on the wrong path, they'll realise socialism/Thatcherism/whateverism is the one true way if only they understood, but I think it would take a lot more practical impact before it happened.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Third :)
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    Fourth like Liz Kendall
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    First...until DQed

    Yes - I still have a podium chance after all....
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    I would have been first, but I was making jam...
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    edited August 2016
    Seventh like Labour.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    I would have been first, but I was making jam...

    Winner...
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Don's 'Too close to call' stance is, bizarrely, one of the most daring predictions in recent times. If he's right, will it be sheer bloody minded stubborness and luck, or outstanding political nous?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    kle4 said:

    Don's 'Too close to call' stance is, bizarrely, one of the most daring predictions in recent times. If he's right, will it be sheer bloody minded stubborness and luck, or outstanding political nous?

    Did we ever find out if Don't Know scored higher than Smith in that one particular poll?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Scott_P said:
    It won't be dead in the water if you keep claiming it is in headlines, Daily Mail!
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,525
    11th.

    Like Seumus Milne in a league of 3 journalists, sorted by quality.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.
    Good for 'Yes (please sir we'd like some more subsidy)'?
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Don's 'Too close to call' stance is, bizarrely, one of the most daring predictions in recent times. If he's right, will it be sheer bloody minded stubborness and luck, or outstanding political nous?

    Don has made some very ballsy calls in the past that have turned out to be very accurate.

    As Mike will tell you, Don was responsible for Mike winning lots of money on Harriet Harman becoming Deputy Leader in 2007 when everyone else was saying Alan Johnson was nailed on.

    Don was working on the campaign, and he knew his stuff.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    kle4 said:

    Don's 'Too close to call' stance is, bizarrely, one of the most daring predictions in recent times. If he's right, will it be sheer bloody minded stubborness and luck, or outstanding political nous?

    He's working for Smith's campaign.

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign."

    If Owen Smith hasn't admitted defeat in public yet, why should Don Brind who works for him do so publicly ?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,525
    Scott_P said:
    Read that as SNP dreaming of leaving with RUK left dead in the water :-).

    Naughty.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    RobD said:

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.

    The Zoomers on my timeline are in meltdown
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
    I'm publishing a very anti Corbyn thread in the morning then on Friday the very pro-Corbyn thread.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    edited August 2016
    Scott_P said:

    htts://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    I actually have issues with almost everything on that page. Overly triumphant headline. Will misses his mum is news? There's a dark reality why a handsome bloke with abs is going shirtless?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Don hoping Saving Labour are the new Messina/Crosby.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
    I'm publishing a very anti Corbyn thread in the morning then on Friday the very pro-Corbyn thread.
    Sneak in a little AV reference in one of them, for me? :)
  • Options
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
    I'm publishing a very anti Corbyn thread in the morning then on Friday the very pro-Corbyn thread.
    Sneak in a little AV reference in one of them, for me? :)
    The Pro Corbyn thread does contain a reference to AV.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
    I'm publishing a very anti Corbyn thread in the morning then on Friday the very pro-Corbyn thread.
    Sneak in a little AV reference in one of them, for me? :)
    The Pro Corbyn thread does contain a reference to AV.
    You beauty!
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,334
    I didn't know Don was actually working with Saving Labour on Owen's campaign. I'm sure no harm was intended, but it would probably be good if article contributors to PB indicated any personal involvement they have in what they're writing about?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    edited August 2016

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    "Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign"

    That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.

    I can think of other explanations for it.

    But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
    I'm publishing a very anti Corbyn thread in the morning then on Friday the very pro-Corbyn thread.
    Sneak in a little AV reference in one of them, for me? :)
    The Pro Corbyn thread does contain a reference to AV.
    Under AV Labour could split and still win an election?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.
    But, Mr. D., there was that independence minded lady (scotslass?) on here this morning telling us that GERS was complete rubbish and should be discarded. So if an independence supporter tells us that GERS is rubbish but GERS actually supports the case for independence where the feck does that leave us?

    I worry sometimes.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    The same way as Corbynistas

    Reality does not intrude on their private dreams
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Scott_P said:
    An unfortunate choice of words there.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    LOL.

    "The Stronger In campaign has finally thrown in the towel, all those corporate millions, Roland Rudd’s spin, Cameron and Osborne’s careers and all they have to show for it is a Commander of the British Empire for Will Straw. Will says the “Stronger In” organisation is no longer.

    Which is amateurism until the end. The database built up at great expense cannot therefore legally be used by another organisation."

    https://twitter.com/EuroGuido/status/768493259618390018
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.
    But, Mr. D., there was that independence minded lady (scotslass?) on here this morning telling us that GERS was complete rubbish and should be discarded. So if an independence supporter tells us that GERS is rubbish but GERS actually supports the case for independence where the feck does that leave us?

    I worry sometimes.
    I admit it, I made it up that it was Good For Yes. :(

    I'll recite a thousand PB Tories as a penance.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926

    I didn't know Don was actually working with Saving Labour on Owen's campaign. I'm sure no harm was intended, but it would probably be good if article contributors to PB indicated any personal involvement they have in what they're writing about?

    Yes I agree - this is a betting site after all.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.

    The Zoomers on my timeline are in meltdown
    Apparently it's all wrong because Scotch Whisky is often exported through England, and when you take that into account by adding that revenue to the Scottish economy you see that it is actually booming.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    kle4 said:

    Don hoping Saving Labour are the new Messina/Crosby.

    Well his rosiest picture for his own campaign involves winning by 3000 votes, on the back of registered supporters and Trade Unionists breaking almost 2-1 in favour of Smith:

    https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/768458503694454784
    So it's very unlikely, I can't see the registered supporters breaking 2-1 for Smith under any circumstance.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    One can live in hope.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,274
    The podcast sounds like wishful thinking to me. Suddenly the non-member voters have swung hugely round the other way?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    The front page of the Record is fun

    Scotland's £14.8bn budget hole (Sturgeon says she is looking into it)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    @SeanT sense of Britishness is more important than an SNP dole scrounger in Paisley's Scotishness.

    Or soemthing.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    I didn't know Don was actually working with Saving Labour on Owen's campaign. I'm sure no harm was intended, but it would probably be good if article contributors to PB indicated any personal involvement they have in what they're writing about?

    Yes I agree - this is a betting site after all.
    Indeed I made fun of Don Brind without knowing he was working for Smith.

    I though he was just an idiot making a fool of himself by spamming "Smith has a chance" on PB all the time, while in fact that was his job.

    No one should be ashamed of his job, but certainly he should say beforehand that he is biased due to his present employment.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    edited August 2016
    In my browsing of my splendid present of Erskine May I note that rather sneakily, in order to cut down on space, detailed explanations of some procedures and precedents (the context and reason for them particularly) are referenced as being in older editions, so really you need the whole set.

    The Lords apparently rule that reading of speeches is 'alien to the customs of the House and injurious to the traditional conduct of its debates'. If you do need to have some notes, they are not supposed to follow them too closely.

    May being blamed for Brexit on the podcast. I imagine if things go poorly that might become more pronounced a view.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    edited August 2016
    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
    The fact May's first visit as PM was to Sturgeon and her second to Merkel and her first No 10 speech invoked the Union shows her priority number 1 is to keep Scotland in the UK, so there will be no hard BREXIT. Some sort of free trade fudge will be agreed, which will be enough for Sturgeon, after a lot of huffing and puffing, to avoid indyref2.
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/768568413501460481

    Wrong. The GERS report was Good For Yes. No ifs, no buts.
    But, Mr. D., there was that independence minded lady (scotslass?) on here this morning telling us that GERS was complete rubbish and should be discarded. So if an independence supporter tells us that GERS is rubbish but GERS actually supports the case for independence where the feck does that leave us?

    I worry sometimes.
    I would love to see the equivalent GERW or GERNI.
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Arizona: Trump 49 Clinton 44. (Trump's highest showing)
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
    The fact May's first visit as PM was to Sturgeon and her second to Merkel and her first No 10 speech invoked the Union shows her priority number 1 is to keep Scotland in the UK, so there will be no hard BREXIT. Some sort of free trade fudge will be agreed, which will be enough for Sturgeon, after a lot of huffing and puffing, to avoid indyref2.
    Nothing will be enough for the SNP, it won't be taken off the table she will say some guff about the Scottish people not calling for it I.e independence is below 60% in the polls.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I didn't know Don was actually working with Saving Labour on Owen's campaign. I'm sure no harm was intended, but it would probably be good if article contributors to PB indicated any personal involvement they have in what they're writing about?

    Yes I agree - this is a betting site after all.
    Indeed I made fun of Don Brind without knowing he was working for Smith.

    I though he was just an idiot making a fool of himself by spamming "Smith has a chance" on PB all the time, while in fact that was his job.

    No one should be ashamed of his job, but certainly he should say beforehand that he is biased due to his present employment.
    Is on.com part of the mainstream media?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    nunu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
    The fact May's first visit as PM was to Sturgeon and her second to Merkel and her first No 10 speech invoked the Union shows her priority number 1 is to keep Scotland in the UK, so there will be no hard BREXIT. Some sort of free trade fudge will be agreed, which will be enough for Sturgeon, after a lot of huffing and puffing, to avoid indyref2.
    Nothing will be enough for the SNP, it won't be taken off the table she will say some guff about the Scottish people not calling for it I.e independence is below 60% in the polls.
    Yes but the reason independence will not be as high in the polls as the SNP hope is that May is more popular in Scotland than Cameron and she will do a BREXIT fudge, not a hard BREXIT
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.
    No oil, no independence.

    The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    @HYUFD

    I know you base a lot on the debates for Trump, but there is an issue beyond the known ones.

    The moderators.

    The Commission on Presidential Debates has delayed it's decision to appoint moderators because it has trouble finding a journalist that hasn't got ties to the nominees or had a public spat with ( finding one that Trump hasn't got into a fight with is impossible).

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/24/media/debate-moderators/index.html

    It's a bipartisan commission so both sides have to agree.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,060
    Speedy said:

    @HYUFD

    I know you base a lot on the debates for Trump, but there is an issue beyond the known ones.

    The moderators.

    The Commission on Presidential Debates has delayed it's decision to appoint moderators because it has trouble finding a journalist that hasn't got ties to the nominees or had a public spat with ( finding one that Trump hasn't got into a fight with is impossible).

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/24/media/debate-moderators/index.html

    It's a bipartisan commission so both sides have to agree.

    Perhaps we could donate Kay Burley to moderate for them?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    Speedy said:

    @HYUFD

    I know you base a lot on the debates for Trump, but there is an issue beyond the known ones.

    The moderators.

    The Commission on Presidential Debates has delayed it's decision to appoint moderators because it has trouble finding a journalist that hasn't got ties to the nominees or had a public spat with ( finding one that Trump hasn't got into a fight with is impossible).

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/24/media/debate-moderators/index.html

    It's a bipartisan commission so both sides have to agree.

    Moderators will not make much difference, I have not seen a general election debate yet which was won because of the moderators
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    You know my longstanding criticism of Reuters polling:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-exclusive-idUSKCN10Z2MO?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social

    The pollster who has Hillary leading by 12 points nationally has her tied in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

    "The candidates are running about even in eight states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina, and the polling sample is too small to determine the winner in Alaska, Wyoming and Washington D.C. "

    Worst thing about it is that it's not even a proper poll:

    "The project, which combines opinion polls with an analysis of voting patterns under different election scenarios"

    Goodnight.
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Speedy said:

    You know my longstanding criticism of Reuters polling:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-exclusive-idUSKCN10Z2MO?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social

    The pollster who has Hillary leading by 12 points nationally has her tied in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

    "The candidates are running about even in eight states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina, and the polling sample is too small to determine the winner in Alaska, Wyoming and Washington D.C. "

    Worst thing about it is that it's not even a proper poll:

    "The project, which combines opinion polls with an analysis of voting patterns under different election scenarios"

    Goodnight.

    I think it is absolutely C**P
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    edited August 2016
    Fascinating Politico interview with Blair in which he fears his brand of centrism, shared by the Clintons, may have had its day in the current global climate. Goodnight
    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/tony-blairs-clinton-blues-227342
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    As I pointed out on CNBC a month ago...
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
    The fact May's first visit as PM was to Sturgeon and her second to Merkel and her first No 10 speech invoked the Union shows her priority number 1 is to keep Scotland in the UK, so there will be no hard BREXIT. Some sort of free trade fudge will be agreed, which will be enough for Sturgeon, after a lot of huffing and puffing, to avoid indyref2.
    A free trade agreement between the EU and the UK would still be Brexit. Indeed, it would still be 'hard' Brexit. The only person who'd be disappointed would be LovinPutin1983 who hankers after the UK joining the Russian customs union.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.

    She may call for one, hoping May would say No. That would be Sturgeon's dream scenario.

  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    That's a very interesting set of results. The Trump "Great Lakes" strategy would seem to be working in Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisonsin and Michigan. But would seem to be falling short in Ohio.

    But. It's failing in Florida (big time), and Virginia.

    If the race tightens, it could the Trump strategy could look very smart.

    My personal guess is that the Great Lakes strategy will end up almost working, but at the expense of losses in New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Colorado (i.e. states with meaningful Hispanic populations). A narrow Clinton victory, but with a somewhat surprising set of results.
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    rcs1000 said:

    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    That's a very interesting set of results. The Trump "Great Lakes" strategy would seem to be working in Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisonsin and Michigan. But would seem to be falling short in Ohio.

    But. It's failing in Florida (big time), and Virginia.

    If the race tightens, it could the Trump strategy could look very smart.

    My personal guess is that the Great Lakes strategy will end up almost working, but at the expense of losses in New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Colorado (i.e. states with meaningful Hispanic populations). A narrow Clinton victory, but with a somewhat surprising set of results.
    NB - the sampling appears to reflect population of USA - large in California for instance - but some of the samples are hardly any better than subsamples in large UK polling.

    Also: Period is quite extended covering (I think) both Conferences and ending about a week ago - a week that has generally been good for Mr Trump I think.

    So - take with a large pinch of NaCl.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    weejonnie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    That's a very interesting set of results. The Trump "Great Lakes" strategy would seem to be working in Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisonsin and Michigan. But would seem to be falling short in Ohio.

    But. It's failing in Florida (big time), and Virginia.

    If the race tightens, it could the Trump strategy could look very smart.

    My personal guess is that the Great Lakes strategy will end up almost working, but at the expense of losses in New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Colorado (i.e. states with meaningful Hispanic populations). A narrow Clinton victory, but with a somewhat surprising set of results.
    NB - the sampling appears to reflect population of USA - large in California for instance - but some of the samples are hardly any better than subsamples in large UK polling.

    Also: Period is quite extended covering (I think) both Conferences and ending about a week ago - a week that has generally been good for Mr Trump I think.

    So - take with a large pinch of NaCl.
    Personal view: Trump has successfully energised a bunch of previously disenfrachised voters (like Leave did in the UK.) But he's also created a backlash: there is no reason for the Republicans to lose the Hispanic and black votes so badly this time around.

    Clinton by 3-5% , I reckon.
  • Options
    DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038
    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    You missed Trump +5 in Maine and Clinton +4 in Missouri, both remarkable in themselves, although the sample sizes in these and in some of the others is a bit on the small side.

    I think, as Michael Moore and others have said, this contest is tighter than the narrative of the last few weeks (since the DNC) would have one believe, a Trump voter is more likely to actually show up at the polling booth than a Hillary voter, and Trump is being dragged down (luckily for Hillary) more by his own party than by the electorate.

    There is definitely a Brexit feel about this election, and although there is still the potential for a strong Democratic victory in the presidential and senate elections, it will require a lot of hard work over the next couple of months. Any lapses in concentration could be fatal.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Ok turned on the news and Farage is giving a speech at a Trump conference.

    Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???

  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    Ok turned on the news and Farage is giving a speech at a Trump conference.

    Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???

    Does he still have the facial hair?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited August 2016
    rcs1000 said:

    weejonnie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    That's a very interesting set of results. The Trump "Great Lakes" strategy would seem to be working in Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisonsin and Michigan. But would seem to be falling short in Ohio.

    But. It's failing in Florida (big time), and Virginia.

    If the race tightens, it could the Trump strategy could look very smart.

    My personal guess is that the Great Lakes strategy will end up almost working, but at the expense of losses in New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Colorado (i.e. states with meaningful Hispanic populations). A narrow Clinton victory, but with a somewhat surprising set of results.
    NB - the sampling appears to reflect population of USA - large in California for instance - but some of the samples are hardly any better than subsamples in large UK polling.

    Also: Period is quite extended covering (I think) both Conferences and ending about a week ago - a week that has generally been good for Mr Trump I think.

    So - take with a large pinch of NaCl.
    Personal view: Trump has successfully energised a bunch of previously disenfrachised voters (like Leave did in the UK.) But he's also created a backlash: there is no reason for the Republicans to lose the Hispanic and black votes so badly this time around.

    Clinton by 3-5% , I reckon.
    If Trump rhetoric had avoided the racism and focused on the outsourced jobs, bad trade, Make America Great, (however flawed it is) he would be a lot more competitive, as those things definitely cut through in my of the states he needs to win.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Moses_ said:

    Ok turned on the news and Farage is giving a speech at a Trump conference.

    Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???

    Does he still have the facial hair?
    Thankfully not...
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,060
    Moses_ said:

    Ok turned on the news and Farage is giving a speech at a Trump conference.

    Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???

    If Trump wins he could become a global mascot for the Anglosphere right. A kind of international Sarah Palin.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Wow. Traingate has made it to Fortune magazine. That is amazing enough, but look at what the article has to say, or rather infer, about the BBC's political leanings:

    "The inconsistency was gleefully jumped on by a U.K. press corps that is solidly anti-Corbyn. (The Tory press and Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News are again him because he stands for everything they loathe; the BBC and The Guardian because his hard-left policies are badly hitting Labour’s poll ratings)."

    http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/richard-branson-jeremy-corbyn-train/
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    weejonnie said:

    There seems to have been a massive IPSOS poll in the USA - polling up to 19th.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus

    Swing States

    Pennsylvania - Tie
    Iowa - Trump +1
    Arizona - Trump +9
    Colorado - Clinton + 3
    Florida - Clinton +6
    Georgia - Trump +5
    Michigan - Tie
    Minnesota - Clinton +7
    Nevada - Clinton +1
    New Hampshire - Clinton +1
    North Carolina - Clinton +1
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Virgina - Clinton +5
    Wisconsin - Clinton +1

    amazing that it hardly shifted the 538 forecast.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Morning all.

    ‘Labour press officer Don Brind is currently working with Saving Labour.’

    Hmm, so I was correct the other day when I pointed out Don’s latest offerings read more like a political broadcast for ‘Saving Labour’ . A minor point perhaps, but in future could we have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, rather than just some chap who ‘regularly contributes to the PB’ ?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:
    It really is over. I wonder how our pb cybernats will react.

    You yourself voted for Brexit whilst admitting it might well be very bad for the economy.

    Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
    45% already did. My fear is another 5% will, but fortunately I appear to be the most pessimistic about that.
    Don't you mean optimistic? :D
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    WTF is going on at Camber Sands? The victims were apparently fully clothed.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,274
    Speedy said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.
    No oil, no independence.

    The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
    And also a view that Iceland and Ireland offered models for Scotland to follow. Both of which crashed and burned in 2008 and the aftermath.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,274

    Moses_ said:

    Ok turned on the news and Farage is giving a speech at a Trump conference.

    Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???

    If Trump wins he could become a global mascot for the Anglosphere right. A kind of international Sarah Palin.
    The Guardian reports (largely anecdotally it would seem) that most of the audience had heard neither of Farage or Brexit and were puzzled as to what was going on. Given the foreign awareness of many backstate Americans I suspect that may be right.
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    Speedy said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.
    No oil, no independence.

    The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
    And also a view that Iceland and Ireland offered models for Scotland to follow. Both of which crashed and burned in 2008 and the aftermath.
    I understand that Iceland and Ireland are doing well now.
  • Options

    Morning all.

    ‘Labour press officer Don Brind is currently working with Saving Labour.’

    Hmm, so I was correct the other day when I pointed out Don’s latest offerings read more like a political broadcast for ‘Saving Labour’ . A minor point perhaps, but in future could we have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, rather than just some chap who ‘regularly contributes to the PB’ ?

    Such a surprise from ex BBC person to see such impartiality. Must be part of the DNA.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    The IPSOS/Reuters overnight data dump has some interesting numbers.

    My notes of caution revolve around the minute sample size in some states but mostly the demographic turnout model :

    White - 70 .. Black 58 .. Asian 45 .. Hispanic 30
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,274

    IanB2 said:

    Speedy said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.
    No oil, no independence.

    The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
    And also a view that Iceland and Ireland offered models for Scotland to follow. Both of which crashed and burned in 2008 and the aftermath.
    I understand that Iceland and Ireland are doing well now.
    Yes they are both well on their way back, after going through a lot of turmoil.

    My point was that during the Salmond years, the apparent boom in Ireland, and to a lesser extent the apparent financial independence of Iceland, offered models of success that contributed to the rise of the SNP's Indy campaign. Nowadays, not so much.
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Speedy said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    Ergo, the SNP - unless they are totally insane - have to row back from indy. How does Nicola do it, and keep her frothy tartan fanbois on board?

    According to the papers she is going to legislate for a new Indyref...
    If I were her, I'd do the same. Legislate, but not call. Hector, but don't move. Throw red meat to her activists, without ever actually doing anything.

    Alternatively she might just go shit for bust and call a 2nd indyref, as she senses the window of final opportunity closing (and it is closing). But firstly she would need permish from Theresa, secondly, she would have to win.

    I do not believe Scots would vote indy. And if the Nats lose again so soon they are destroyed as a party, and will split.

    Tough call for Nicola. We will see if she is as good a politician as they say.
    No oil, no independence.

    The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
    And also a view that Iceland and Ireland offered models for Scotland to follow. Both of which crashed and burned in 2008 and the aftermath.
    I understand that Iceland and Ireland are doing well now.
    Yes they are both well on their way back, after going through a lot of turmoil.

    My point was that during the Salmond years, the apparent boom in Ireland, and to a lesser extent the apparent financial independence of Iceland, offered models of success that contributed to the rise of the SNP's Indy campaign. Nowadays, not so much.
    Ireland would be a good model.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,216
    Morning all,

    Sandbrook lays into Jezza over traingate this morning. Mostly predictable, none the less hits the target well. The hardcore cultists are not going to switch, but maybe some of the undecided, longer standing Labour members and unions bods who are voting this week, will think twice about the alleged 'integrity' of a man who pulls stunts like this.

    "These days, Labour have been reduced to squatting in a train corridor, even though there are seats available further down the carriage. There is surely a metaphor in there somewhere."

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3757395/Corbyn-s-Virgin-train-stunt-shows-s-stuck-1970s.html#ixzz4IK2mRYmy
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Morning all.

    ‘Labour press officer Don Brind is currently working with Saving Labour.’

    Hmm, so I was correct the other day when I pointed out Don’s latest offerings read more like a political broadcast for ‘Saving Labour’ . A minor point perhaps, but in future could we have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, rather than just some chap who ‘regularly contributes to the PB’ ?

    Locally known as Don.
  • Options
    Should there not be a betting market on how many labour leadership contests there will be before may 2020?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,060
    Charles said:
    He must have meant 'altruistic patricians with interests in the region'.
  • Options

    NEW THREAD NEW THREAD

This discussion has been closed.