Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pete Buttigieg’s an interesting candidate but shouldn’t be a f

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited April 13 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pete Buttigieg’s an interesting candidate but shouldn’t be a favourite

Precedent is a good guide but a bad determinant. To believe that something cannot happen because it hasn’t previously happened is to end up being unpleasantly surprised. It’s therefore possible that the Democrats could look past the current or former governors, senators and vice-president in order to select as their candidate someone who’s not just the mayor of a city the size of Chesterfield but who’s still in his thirties and gay. Possible but surely unlikely, you’d think.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,170
    This sounds like the first comment on a thread in May 2005 when I suggested that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States. He was then 50 to 1
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,570
    If Trump can be president, Corbyn can be Labour leader and the UK can Brexit, who’s to say what’s possible.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,170
    Mayor Pete is formally launching his campaign today and the most interesting figure will be how much raises in the first 24 hours afterwards. You could equally argue that the fact that the leaders are aged 76 and 77 which is totally unprecedented makes them an even greater risk
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,995
    edited April 13
    Whoa, Kamala Harris has dropped way back. I'm not a fan and I've said she was over-hyped before and doesn't have the required spikiness but objectively, she's running a professional campaign, plenty of money, state with lots of voters, she's got more chance than 7%.

    Edit: Doh, that's a poll not odds
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,570
    edited April 13
    If you want to be president with a complex three syllable + name, you quickly need to find a short form like FDR, Ike and JFK. Vote PB.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 51,495
    Maybe he shouldn't be 14-1, but Marco Rubio went odds on after finishing third in Iowa. So he'll probably shorten yet.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 6,783
    Scott_P said:
    'This is Brexit at its best' - true, but not in the way they think it is.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 28,385
    His odds feel about right to me.
  • Scott_P said:
    I’ve never set foot in an Aldi store and this gives me another reason not to do so.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 45,391
    Ishmael_Z said:

    'This is Brexit at its best' - true, but not in the way they think it is.

    Barriers to trade leading to disrupted food supply and shortages in the shops.

    It's almost too good...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 24,628
    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 21,495
    Good to see a header on Buttigieg. I am very green on the young mayor.

    As Alastair says he will probably shorten further and then I will lay off a little.

    The first debate will be fascinating.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,050
    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 24,628
    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,050
    edited April 13

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,830
    FPT, for Mr Dancer:

    It appears that it’s possible to run as an individual candidate in the EU elections, although there’s a hefty £5k deposit to find.

    https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/candidate-or-agent/european-parliamentary-elections

    I wonder if we are about to see a few prominent people crowdfunding for campaign funds on a ‘F the politicians’ platform?

    I believe that Mr @Lennon, of this parish, stood for the Pirate party in the last general election.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,050

    This sounds like the first comment on a thread in May 2005 when I suggested that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States. He was then 50 to 1

    I remember that day well. It made you famous and me infamous
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 5,292
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
    As rich as you, Roger? ;)

    Btw, it's interesting that you can have a black or gay US President now, but I doubt you could have an atheist.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    edited April 13
    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 29,865

    This sounds like the first comment on a thread in May 2005 when I suggested that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States. He was then 50 to 1

    I read it in a book by a certain political blogger... can't think who....
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219
    Tories in free fall. Labour on just over 30%. Oh dear. Its gonna get ugly. Looks like my 12 to 15 Tory euros prediction might be optimistic given direction of travel!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 29,865
    Scott_P said:
    Broken, sleazy UKIP and Tories on the slide!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    It doesn't count if you're royalty
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    edited April 13
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 5,292
    Roger said:

    This sounds like the first comment on a thread in May 2005 when I suggested that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States. He was then 50 to 1

    I remember that day well. It made you famous and me infamous
    It has to be the longest running joke on PB - that and my cross-dressing. ;-)
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    I don’t understand your second paragraph. How will his being gay take down other candidates?

    He has the temperament to be a good president. He now needs some policies that are a little more relevant to daily life than abolishing the electoral college or transgender bathrooms.

    Go Pete!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    I make Sanders or Biden still favourite (the former if he wins Iowa and New Hampshire) but Buttigieg if he does well could be top of their VP shortlist along with O'Rourke
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842

    Scott_P said:
    Broken, sleazy UKIP and Tories on the slide!
    Tories plus Brexit Party combined on 29%, 5% ahead of Labour and it is a PR election so they also get 26 seats combined to 25 for Labour as a result
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    edited April 13
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
    The Yougov numbers had UKIP on 14%, not 11% so they get a one more seat. I think it would be touch and go between Labour, Brexit, and Conservative who picks up the last seat in each region. I don't think Labour would get 25 on those numbers.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    I once played tennis with the Sultan of Brunei's nephew at Tonbridge so a few went elsewhere
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,112
    Jonathan said:

    If you want to be president with a complex three syllable + name, you quickly need to find a short form like FDR, Ike and JFK. Vote PB.

    He's already mostly referred to as Mayor Pete. It's a short step from that to being simply Pete.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 14,408
    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    As Frankie Boyle pointed out, Brunei has a very specific meaning phonetically in Glasgow, and the Sultan of Broon Eye suggests the more flamboyant & licentious type of gay man.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,770

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
    As rich as you, Roger? ;)

    Btw, it's interesting that you can have a black or gay US President now, but I doubt you could have an atheist.
    Hmmmm... Not so sure the voting block that prevents an atheist doesn't also prevent a gay President. We'll see. Coastal US is more accepting of homosexuality than Brunei. But the rest of the States? You'd like to think so, but....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
    The Yougov numbers had UKIP on 14%, not 11% so they get a one more seat. I think it would be touch and go between Labour, Brexit, and Conservative who picks up the last seat in each region. I don't think Labour would get 25 on those numbers.
    UKIP doing better than LDs too
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 21,495
    Forsyth in Sun:


    "A decade ago, one of those who knows the Tory party best told me that the Tories would only turn to Boris when they were 3-0 down with 15 minutes to go.

    They now are three down and that means Boris is back in contention for the premiership."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,770
    "Admittedly, it’s the sort of record that would usually be a launchpad to gubernatorial or Congressional office rather than a shot at the White House."

    The record of the current incumbent in the White House wouldn't even have been a launchpad to gubernatorial or Congressional office. But, if he can become universally known as "Pete", and run on the ticket of "I'm everything Tump is not...." then that could take him far.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 24,628
    You can still lay the Conservatives for most seats at 2.1. Anyone got a clear idea how their polling position is going to improve?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,498
    Congratulations to MD on his Chinese GP call.

    Curiously, Vettel was over half a second slower than his pole time last year; Mercedes fractionally faster than their previous performance.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,770
    edited April 13

    Forsyth in Sun:


    "A decade ago, one of those who knows the Tory party best told me that the Tories would only turn to Boris when they were 3-0 down with 15 minutes to go.

    They now are three down and that means Boris is back in contention for the premiership."

    "The crowd are on the pitch...they think it's all over. It is now...."

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,252

    You can still lay the Conservatives for most seats at 2.1. Anyone got a clear idea how their polling position is going to improve?

    We leave the EU. How does Labour’s position improve?

  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,142

    This sounds like the first comment on a thread in May 2005 when I suggested that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States. He was then 50 to 1

    In some ways Mayor Pete has a lot in common with Obama, both of them being much less well known than other candidates, charismatic, and positive. On the other hand Mayor Pete is probably weaker than Obama on all 3 points. There's 'relatively unknown Senator' and then there's 'Almost entirely unknown Mayor', and his oratory isn't at Obama's level.

    Obama showed there is *a* path to victory for a fresh-faced semi-outsider, but that doesn't mean any or every fresh-faced semi-outsider can walk it.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
    As rich as you, Roger? ;)

    Btw, it's interesting that you can have a black or gay US President now, but I doubt you could have an atheist.
    Hmmmm... Not so sure the voting block that prevents an atheist doesn't also prevent a gay President. We'll see. Coastal US is more accepting of homosexuality than Brunei. But the rest of the States? You'd like to think so, but....
    Yes, because thinking that homosexuals are immoral and that homosexuals should be put to death is the same.

    Can we please stop this false equivalence?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219

    You can still lay the Conservatives for most seats at 2.1. Anyone got a clear idea how their polling position is going to improve?

    For GE or Euros? Euros it wont. GE, get Brexit through and new leader. Just new leader would improve it, always does.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 738

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 14,408

    Forsyth in Sun:


    "A decade ago, one of those who knows the Tory party best told me that the Tories would only turn to Boris when they were 3-0 down with 15 minutes to go.

    They now are three down and that means Boris is back in contention for the premiership."

    If Tories are now managing to accomodate the the possibility of voting for Farage & the Brexit Party, coming to terms with Boris should be a piece of piss.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,252
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.

    Does the seat allocation actually matter, though? What everyone will be looking at is the Leave/Remain split. If the election does turn into a quasi-referendum, Labour could find itself losing votes.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,112
    The current frontrunner hasn't declared for the race and has form for taking a lot of time to decide not to run. Maybe he's waiting to see if a strong candidate will emerge who he can support? Is there a benefit to Biden in delaying entering the race?

    I think the market might have already priced in a winning performance in the first debate. If he disappoints, or someone else notably excels, then there could be a major lengthening in his odds.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207
    nunuone said:

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
    Polling suggests that homosexuality is tolerated less by black Americans than other ethnic groups. Considering their weight in the Democratic coalition, that could be quite a large obstacle to victory.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    nunuone said:

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
    But, with the same voters, having served in the army will not be looked upon Kindly/
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.

    Does the seat allocation actually matter, though? What everyone will be looking at is the Leave/Remain split. If the election does turn into a quasi-referendum, Labour could find itself losing votes.

    I think the anti-Brexit parties will gain from Labour, and the Brexit Party will continue to gain from the Conservatives and UKIP.

    I wonder if Farage will join Salvini's new grouping.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 14,408
    RoyalBlue said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
    As rich as you, Roger? ;)

    Btw, it's interesting that you can have a black or gay US President now, but I doubt you could have an atheist.
    Hmmmm... Not so sure the voting block that prevents an atheist doesn't also prevent a gay President. We'll see. Coastal US is more accepting of homosexuality than Brunei. But the rest of the States? You'd like to think so, but....
    Yes, because thinking that homosexuals are immoral and that homosexuals should be put to death is the same.

    Can we please stop this false equivalence?
    They're pretty connected. Those who think homosexuals should be stoned to death think that because (however fucked up that is) they think homosexuality is immoral, not because they diasapprove of their fashion sense.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,411

    Forsyth in Sun:


    "A decade ago, one of those who knows the Tory party best told me that the Tories would only turn to Boris when they were 3-0 down with 15 minutes to go.

    They now are three down and that means Boris is back in contention for the premiership."

    The tories are going to need somebody who can talk 100 Years War, Aggressively Managed No Deal WTO Brexit with Sectoral Mini-Deals before a GE and then, if they somehow manage to win, effortlessly pivot to 2nd Ref/Revoke after it.

    Only Boris has the sort of shameless amoral vacuity required. The tories would be mad to go for anyone else.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,148
    Con voting intention imploding and I suspect we are some way from the practical floor for the blues. Interesting times ahead - I wonder what Phil Hammond’s spreadsheet says about this situation.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207

    RoyalBlue said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Interesting that in America a gay man could become president whereas the Brunai Royal Family has just decreed that homosexuality should be punishable by stoning.

    Almost the entire Brunai royal family went to Millfield. One shared a room with me. Happily I can confirm absolute probity during the entirity of that year otherwise I would have no hesitation in reporting him for a retrospective stoning.

    What goes on in Millfield stays in Millfield.
    Including my address book....... I later saw him on TV with Prince Charles where he was described as 'one of the richest men in the world'
    As rich as you, Roger? ;)

    Btw, it's interesting that you can have a black or gay US President now, but I doubt you could have an atheist.
    Hmmmm... Not so sure the voting block that prevents an atheist doesn't also prevent a gay President. We'll see. Coastal US is more accepting of homosexuality than Brunei. But the rest of the States? You'd like to think so, but....
    Yes, because thinking that homosexuals are immoral and that homosexuals should be put to death is the same.

    Can we please stop this false equivalence?
    They're pretty connected. Those who think homosexuals should be stoned to death think that because (however fucked up that is) they think homosexuality is immoral, not because they diasapprove of their fashion sense.
    Of course they are related, but they are not the same, and the scale of the problem is not the same.

    I would also note that in the USA attitudes to homosexuality continue to grow more tolerant. I am not aware of any such trend in the Islamic world.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 738
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.

    Does the seat allocation actually matter, though? What everyone will be looking at is the Leave/Remain split. If the election does turn into a quasi-referendum, Labour could find itself losing votes.

    I think the anti-Brexit parties will gain from Labour, and the Brexit Party will continue to gain from the Conservatives and UKIP.

    I wonder if Farage will join Salvini's new grouping.
    I don't think that's true
    Sean_F said:

    nunuone said:

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
    But, with the same voters, having served in the army will not be looked upon Kindly/</blockquote

    I don't that's true. I think that's more of a caricature. The same way some caricature conservative Americans as all being racist or anti gay.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 3,880

    You can still lay the Conservatives for most seats at 2.1. Anyone got a clear idea how their polling position is going to improve?

    We leave the EU. How does Labour’s position improve?

    If we leave the EU presumably the EP elections will be cancelled.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219
    TGOHF said:

    Con voting intention imploding and I suspect we are some way from the practical floor for the blues. Interesting times ahead - I wonder what Phil Hammond’s spreadsheet says about this situation.

    Westminster floor in polling probably 20%, in reality 25%?
    Euro floor single figures
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219
    Con performance at GE will be ameliorated by how strong or weak labour are. The fear of labour vote will turn out the stronger they are as in 97 vs Blair compared to polling suggestions
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    TGOHF said:

    Con voting intention imploding and I suspect we are some way from the practical floor for the blues. Interesting times ahead - I wonder what Phil Hammond’s spreadsheet says about this situation.

    He'll probably make some more helpful comments about seeking a second referendum.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,842
    Scott_P said:
    Tories plus Brexit Party on 36%, 4% ahead of Labour
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207
    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,498

    The current frontrunner hasn't declared for the race and has form for taking a lot of time to decide not to run. Maybe he's waiting to see if a strong candidate will emerge who he can support? Is there a benefit to Biden in delaying entering the race?

    I think the market might have already priced in a winning performance in the first debate. If he disappoints, or someone else notably excels, then there could be a major lengthening in his odds.

    The benefit so far has been to avoid posting fundraising figures for the end of March, which might have been embarrassing, and giving himself less time to gaffe. As front runner, he hasn’t had much to gain by declaring early, and plenty to lose.

    My guess is that he’s going to find things start to become much more difficult once he declares.

    The debates are going to be interesting, but there’s an awful lot of candidates qualifying for them. As we saw with Trump, being a dominant personality is of more importance than any particular accomplishment in debate, when you’re in a crowd.
  • RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 27,843
    edited April 13
    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    Perhaps those of us who said before the referendum that voting for Brexit would lead to a Corbyn government were right.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,489
    Sean_F said:

    nunuone said:

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
    But, with the same voters, having served in the army will not be looked upon Kindly/
    I don't think that will be a problem. Even among the left of the Democrats they aren't anti-soldier. Far less politically damaging to have been in a war than to have voted for a war. I don't know that being gay will end up being that much of a plus though. He's still a white male so those who are motivated by identity politics will want someone who ticks more boxes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,498

    Sean_F said:

    nunuone said:

    He’s rising in the polls, getting lots of favourable media coverage, breaking out into public awareness and the money is flowing in. His odds aren’t that silly. He’s got momentum.

    Being gay is a plus not a minus. By the end of his run political palaeontologists will be looking at the political corpses his sexuality has attracted in the way their science cousins look at the tar pits of La Brea.

    His price may well be a bit too short now but it looks like it’s shortening a way yet. I expect I’ll be laying him eventually but he is going to continue moving through the field. He’s got talent and a distinctive pitch. No doubt it will be tested soon enough.

    Mayor Pete being gay, I feel is a positive in a Democratic primary that takes intersectionality very seriously.
    But, with the same voters, having served in the army will not be looked upon Kindly/
    I don't think that will be a problem. Even among the left of the Democrats they aren't anti-soldier. Far less politically damaging to have been in a war than to have voted for a war. I don't know that being gay will end up being that much of a plus though. He's still a white male so those who are motivated by identity politics will want someone who ticks more boxes.
    A large majority of Democrats want a candidate who will win. The rest is secondary.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360
    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    If the Brexit party tops the poll, I'm sure there will be those arguing that it proves the public want to stop Brexit.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,252
    Sean_F said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    If the Brexit party tops the poll, I'm sure there will be those arguing that it proves the public want to stop Brexit.

    That is quite possible, isn’t it?

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 49,193
    Mr. Eagles, be interesting to see what would've happened had Remain won with 52%.

    I imagine there'd be a lesser Conservative split, but with far more competent leadership.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 4,423

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    It would appear to have united a disparate coalition of voters in the country.
    Around the belief that the Tory government is crap.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219
    edited April 13
    May 2 will be somewhat instructive. How prepared are the super cross to abstain or move their cross? It's far easier to tell a pollster you are abandoning a lifetime of support than do so in the booth. If the Tories can stay within a few % of labour at the locals and euros they should hold on at a GE to largest party, esp as UKIP will not be standing many candidates (cashflow) and Brexit will have less impact IF we have left in some fashion
  • isamisam Posts: 26,443
    edited April 13
    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the referendum was betrayed.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,050
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.
    Provincials 38

    Progressives 32
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,770

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.

    Does the seat allocation actually matter, though? What everyone will be looking at is the Leave/Remain split. If the election does turn into a quasi-referendum, Labour could find itself losing votes.

    The UK sending 38 MEPs who are somewhere between lukewarm and absolute zero on the EU - many wanting to make life as awkward as they can in Brussels - is what Brussels will see.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 27,843
    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the refeeendum was betrayed.
    It wasn't "allowed"; it was legislated for by a parliament elected after the referendum. The parties put forward manifestos that made pledges about the Brexit deal. Labour said they wanted the benefits of the single market and customs union. The Tories said we needed to know the future relationship at the end of the Article 50 period.

    What's you're witnessing is not the betrayal of Brexit, but the failure of Brexit.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,148
    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the referendum was betrayed.
    The stupidity was agreeing a deal that wasn’t acceptable to MPs.
  • Mr. Eagles, be interesting to see what would've happened had Remain won with 52%.

    I imagine there'd be a lesser Conservative split, but with far more competent leadership.

    Leavers would have respected the will of the people and united behind Dave and George’s leadership.

    There would have been no talk of another plebiscite allowing Osborne to focus his fire on the Corbyn and McDonnell plan to turn the UK into Venezuela.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 21,648
    Scott_P said:
    what divvies, long jail sentences required to stop these lunatics.
  • isamisam Posts: 26,443

    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the refeeendum was betrayed.
    It wasn't "allowed"; it was legislated for by a parliament elected after the referendum. The parties put forward manifestos that made pledges about the Brexit deal. Labour said they wanted the benefits of the single market and customs union. The Tories said we needed to know the future relationship at the end of the Article 50 period.

    What's you're witnessing is not the betrayal of Brexit, but the failure of Brexit.
    Allowing a group of people at odds with the country on the subject a meaningful vote betrayed the referendum
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 21,648
    Unionist Brexit parties doing well in Scotland NOT, even in Edinburgh. Good thing Roothie has got herself on the losers list seats for next election.
    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17569879.snp-win-by-election-as-remain-parties-advance/?ref=mr&lp=2
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 5,219
    edited April 13
    I suspect the clamor for PR will be strong after the next GE again. I'd personally prefer a scots/Welsh type arrangement. 500 constituency mps and 150 top ups or if not a directly elected upper chamber with a 2/3 veto on non budget and QS legislation by full PR
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,360

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:
    I think that would produce a result of something like:

    Labour 20
    Conservative 14
    Brexit 14
    UKIP 10
    Green6
    Lib Dem 2
    Change 1
    SNP2
    Plaid 1
    Northern Ireland 3

    In terms of maximising representation at regional level, it's an almost perfect result for anti-EU parties, at the same time as wasting a huge number of votes for pro-EU parties. Either one of the pro-EU parties has to break out of the pack, or they all have to pull votes away from Labour.

    Does the seat allocation actually matter, though? What everyone will be looking at is the Leave/Remain split. If the election does turn into a quasi-referendum, Labour could find itself losing votes.

    The UK sending 38 MEPs who are somewhere between lukewarm and absolute zero on the EU - many wanting to make life as awkward as they can in Brussels - is what Brussels will see.
    Add the DUP and it's 39. But, then subtract Charles Tannock who's strongly pro-EU.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 27,843
    isam said:

    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the refeeendum was betrayed.
    It wasn't "allowed"; it was legislated for by a parliament elected after the referendum. The parties put forward manifestos that made pledges about the Brexit deal. Labour said they wanted the benefits of the single market and customs union. The Tories said we needed to know the future relationship at the end of the Article 50 period.

    What's you're witnessing is not the betrayal of Brexit, but the failure of Brexit.
    Allowing a group of people at odds with the country on the subject a meaningful vote betrayed the referendum
    Some people are determined to feel betrayed.
  • Well I’m going canvassing in Yorkshire today.

    I’ll let you how bad it is for the blue meanies.
  • isamisam Posts: 26,443
    edited April 13

    isam said:

    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the refeeendum was betrayed.
    It wasn't "allowed"; it was legislated for by a parliament elected after the referendum. The parties put forward manifestos that made pledges about the Brexit deal. Labour said they wanted the benefits of the single market and customs union. The Tories said we needed to know the future relationship at the end of the Article 50 period.

    What's you're witnessing is not the betrayal of Brexit, but the failure of Brexit.
    Allowing a group of people at odds with the country on the subject a meaningful vote betrayed the referendum
    Some people are determined to feel betrayed.
    It’s the referendum that was betrayed, not any person
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,207

    Well I’m going canvassing in Yorkshire today.

    I’ll let you how bad it is for the blue meanies.

    Good luck.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,498
    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the referendum was betrayed.
    So allowing a democratic vote on the implementation of Brexit amounts to ‘betrayal’ ?

    In what way does the country owe allegiance to a referendum vote ?

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,498

    Well I’m going canvassing in Yorkshire today.

    I’ll let you how bad it is for the blue meanies.

    Which party will you be canvassing for ?
    :smile:

  • isamisam Posts: 26,443
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Very worrying polling for the Tories. Perhaps those of us who said that failing to deliver Brexit guarantees a Corbyn Government were right after all?

    A No Deal Brexit ensures a Corbyn premiership.

    I also remember back in 2016 by Tory Leavers that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party and country.
    We could have left with a deal by now, if it weren’t for the stupidity of 40 of our MPs.
    The stupidity was allowing the meaningful vote. As soon as that was permissible, the referendum was betrayed.
    So allowing a democratic vote on the implementation of Brexit amounts to ‘betrayal’ ?

    In what way does the country owe allegiance to a referendum vote ?

    Yes.

    Anyone with a sense of honour would not have to ask that question
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,148
    edited April 13
    I must say I’m curious as to why this Remainer tactic of mocking the lower classes is being continued at pace - I’m not convinced it’s effective - or is it just a comfort blanket ?
This discussion has been closed.