Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hillary Clinton’s good week gets even better

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hillary Clinton’s good week gets even better

Firstly there was the reaction to the initial Democratic candidates live TV debate. The general view was that she had been the winner and this had been backed up by the polling. This had an immediate impact on her betting price

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Is it just me or is this one of the weakest American presidential fields in many years?

    For the GOP enough has been written already. Where are the serious contenders?

    For the Democrats Hillary seems the untouchable presumptive nominee, but then she did eight years ago and was defeated by a charismatic young black senator. She is a very flawed candidate where is the serious competition?
  • Sorry. First like Corbyn in the leadership election.

    And second like Corbyn in the General Election.
  • Sorry. First like Corbyn in the leadership election.

    And second like Corbyn in the General Election.

    Third. Like Labour at the next GE.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    Is it just me or is this one of the weakest American presidential fields in many years?

    For the GOP enough has been written already. Where are the serious contenders?

    For the Democrats Hillary seems the untouchable presumptive nominee, but then she did eight years ago and was defeated by a charismatic young black senator. She is a very flawed candidate where is the serious competition?

    Clinton froze the field on the Democrats side, similar to Gordon Brown for Labour a few years back. It takes a bold politician to go up against someone that will almost certainly be the next leader of the party. And the Clintons are notoriously unforgiving.
  • JEO said:

    Is it just me or is this one of the weakest American presidential fields in many years?

    For the GOP enough has been written already. Where are the serious contenders?

    For the Democrats Hillary seems the untouchable presumptive nominee, but then she did eight years ago and was defeated by a charismatic young black senator. She is a very flawed candidate where is the serious competition?

    Clinton froze the field on the Democrats side, similar to Gordon Brown for Labour a few years back. It takes a bold politician to go up against someone that will almost certainly be the next leader of the party. And the Clintons are notoriously unforgiving.
    The difference is that the UK operates based on a united political party where patronage and jobs for politicians as a result is virtually entirely dependent upon the party leader.

    The US operates in a much looser party structure without a formal party leader (the nominee or even President are not the head of the party) where people are elected to positions like Senator through their own local electorate and not thanks to the party leader.

    So what happened with Brown is not supposed to happen in the USA.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    Clinton is truly remarkable. I can't think of a more resilient politician. What other candidate has had this much scrutiny before the election and come through it? And who else could have survived the defeat by Obama in 2008 and come through stronger?

    If she gets it, no one could argue that she hasn't earned it. Wonder what she will do with office.

    Amazing really.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804
    JEO said:

    Is it just me or is this one of the weakest American presidential fields in many years?

    For the GOP enough has been written already. Where are the serious contenders?

    For the Democrats Hillary seems the untouchable presumptive nominee, but then she did eight years ago and was defeated by a charismatic young black senator. She is a very flawed candidate where is the serious competition?

    Clinton froze the field on the Democrats side, similar to Gordon Brown for Labour a few years back. It takes a bold politician to go up against someone that will almost certainly be the next leader of the party. And the Clintons are notoriously unforgiving.
    Morning all,

    Depends what you mean by 'weakest'. Hillary must one of the most trained candidates for POTUS in recent history, having both been in the White House as an active first lady and having been sec of state. She should at least have some idea what she is doing from day one in the white house, if she wins, rather than pratting about finding the restrooms.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804
    Jonathan said:

    Clinton is truly remarkable. I can't think of a more resilient politician. What other candidate has had this much scrutiny before the election and come through it? And who else could have survived the defeat by Obama in 2008 and come through stronger?

    If she gets it, no one could argue that she hasn't earned it. Wonder what she will do with office.

    Amazing really.

    Nixon was another candidate who survived losing and came back stronger.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    The nearest equivalent I can think of is Nixon, coming back from defeat by JFK and the Chequers scandal.

    Should be interesting if she gets in!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197

    Jonathan said:

    Clinton is truly remarkable. I can't think of a more resilient politician. What other candidate has had this much scrutiny before the election and come through it? And who else could have survived the defeat by Obama in 2008 and come through stronger?

    If she gets it, no one could argue that she hasn't earned it. Wonder what she will do with office.

    Amazing really.

    Nixon was another candidate who survived losing and came back stronger.
    great minds...
  • Jonathan said:

    The nearest equivalent I can think of is Nixon, coming back from defeat by JFK and the Chequers scandal.

    Should be interesting if she gets in!

    Nixon after losing in 1960 also ran for Governor of California and lost.

    Very resilient chap.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Clinton is truly remarkable. I can't think of a more resilient politician. What other candidate has had this much scrutiny before the election and come through it? And who else could have survived the defeat by Obama in 2008 and come through stronger?

    If she gets it, no one could argue that she hasn't earned it. Wonder what she will do with office.

    Amazing really.

    Nixon was another candidate who survived losing and came back stronger.
    great minds...
    Let's hope the parallels don't go too far.
  • Good morning. Another day, and two more devolution agreements with the north east of England. Labour opposed. Tell me this- why do Labour seem to oppose everything now? I would've thought a devolution deal would give them a prime opportunity to test out their economic mantra on the local populous.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    edited October 2015
    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804
    HYUFD said:

    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall

    Hm. Not so sure, and I have bet accordingly. Too much attention is being focused on these early states. They give momentum and also losing badly may mean funders desert, but the likes of Jeb know the rich pickings, delegates-wise, are in later states such as Texas & Florida which come in March.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016 for a useful list.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Can't help thinking if her name was anything but Clinton she'd stand no chance, the Americans love a personality above anything else it seems.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975

    HYUFD said:

    Morning all.

    Based on last night’s local election results, the Meacher by-election should be V interesting.

    Do you think? Bad night for Labour but poor night for UKIP too. If the local by-elections are any guide then OW&R will be a comfortable Labour hold ahead of the Tories in second on a lowish turnout. There may well be a net swing to the Tories but Labour will spin that as the drop-off of Meacher's personal vote / UKIP voters 'going home'. I'm not sure either argument will hold too much water (how many Tory-inclined voters went for Meacher on a personal level? Were UKIP's voters really ex-Tory?) but once you're into that kind of detail the public's tuned out. Labour won't lose and won't come close to losing so whatever the underlying movements, the media will ignore it, as will politicians looking for a reason to.

    However, for psephological nerds, it could tell us a lot about the lie of the land going into next year's local and PCC elections.
    UKIP came second in the seat even in May when the Tories won a national majority. I expect both Labour and the Tories to lose vote share, Labour to hold but with their majority down, UKIP up
    Yes but UKIP have been down in every election and poll since the GE sometimes by quite large percentages. Haven't they lost all their defences since the GE, except for one hold? They have also lost their one Council.
    Labour win easily, Tories 2nd, UKIP third and saved deposit if they're lucky.
    No, they'll do better than that. There are still a lot of protest votes and this part of Oldham has a well-established and sizable populist-right section. I'd be surprised to see UKIP drop below 15%. I'd also expect more than three parties to save their deposits.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,280
    Jonathan said:

    Clinton is truly remarkable. I can't think of a more resilient politician. What other candidate has had this much scrutiny before the election and come through it? And who else could have survived the defeat by Obama in 2008 and come through stronger?

    If she gets it, no one could argue that she hasn't earned it. Wonder what she will do with office.

    Amazing really.

    Being now up to date on House of Cards (US) what I find even more extraordinary is that her husband was POTUS. I know this seems like stating the obvious. But what a couple - they find each other well before political ambition is realised and then not only he but subsequently she aspires to, perhaps reaches the highest office in the land.

    Match.com would have a field day analysing the profiles...
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    On topic, Hillary will win and Hillary will lose, providing that the Republicans manage to avoid the nutcases and charisma bypass candidates.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,584
    Not knowing much about the email accusation against Hillary, but at what point will it all be resolved? Could she still be indicted after she receives the Democrat nomination?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Only saw snippets of the hearing on the news, but it seemed the committee was more interested in party political bickering than anything else.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804

    On topic, Hillary will win and Hillary will lose, providing that the Republicans manage to avoid the nutcases and charisma bypass candidates.

    Big ask at moment!
  • For giggles, Hillary should have said the Benghazi hearings were a vast right wing conspiracy.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Lol

    "We apologise to @timfarron and our Lib Dem reader" - ouch @TheSun https://t.co/vnQfJuxNDS
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640

    On topic, Hillary will win and Hillary will lose, providing that the Republicans manage to avoid the nutcases and charisma bypass candidates.

    Except they won't bypass them, Trump will be nominee in my view. The fact Republicans said he was the best general election candidate in a poll this week confirmed
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,804

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I don't know. There's so many of them, the bloke down the road could be running.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,280

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I have been stopped at a traffic light in New York while the presidential convoy passes in front of me (I was first in the queue). Does that count?

    Plus when you see in films the ridiculous number of vehicles (20-30, etc) in said convoy I can tell you that it does not reflect reality. In reality there are at least 100 vehicles of one type or another.

    I suppose film producers sacrifice verisimilitude to avoid it becoming boring.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    edited October 2015

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    One degree of separation, but I was operated on several times by the neurosurgeon for three American presidents (Bush Snr, Reagan, Johnson).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640

    HYUFD said:

    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall

    Hm. Not so sure, and I have bet accordingly. Too much attention is being focused on these early states. They give momentum and also losing badly may mean funders desert, but the likes of Jeb know the rich pickings, delegates-wise, are in later states such as Texas & Florida which come in March.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016 for a useful list.
    That was the Giuliani strategy in 2008 it was a disaster. If you do not win at least one of Iowa or NH you will not be nominee
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,392

    On topic, Hillary will win and Hillary will lose, providing that the Republicans manage to avoid the nutcases and charisma bypass candidates.

    Therein lies the problem.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,574

    Can't help thinking if her name was anything but Clinton she'd stand no chance, the Americans love a personality above anything else it seems.

    It's kind of like re-inventing the monarchy in a bad way.
  • TOPPING said:

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I have been stopped at a traffic light in New York while the presidential convoy passes in front of me (I was first in the queue). Does that count?

    Plus when you see in films the ridiculous number of vehicles (20-30, etc) in said convoy I can tell you that it does not reflect reality. In reality there are at least 100 vehicles of one type or another.

    I suppose film producers sacrifice verisimilitude to avoid it becoming boring.
    I once managed to put my vehicle in Tony Blair's motorcade on the A1.

    Was a miracle I wasn't shot by the rozzers
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. Topping, I believe film invented the countdown to launches. If memory serves, a count-up used to occur, but they saw the films and decided countdowns were more exciting.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I attended a Bill Clinton speech/Q&A a few years back.
    TOPPING said:

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I have been stopped at a traffic light in New York while the presidential convoy passes in front of me (I was first in the queue). Does that count?

    Plus when you see in films the ridiculous number of vehicles (20-30, etc) in said convoy I can tell you that it does not reflect reality. In reality there are at least 100 vehicles of one type or another.

    I suppose film producers sacrifice verisimilitude to avoid it becoming boring.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,392

    Is it just me or is this one of the weakest American presidential fields in many years?

    For the GOP enough has been written already. Where are the serious contenders?

    For the Democrats Hillary seems the untouchable presumptive nominee, but then she did eight years ago and was defeated by a charismatic young black senator. She is a very flawed candidate where is the serious competition?

    My thoughts exactly. I really don't see the appeal of Hillary.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,869
    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    New data on levels of public trust in the #EU (from Eurobarometer). Lighter the shade=lower trust. Look at UK... https://t.co/jxyR84tN4U
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,316

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    One degree of separation, but I was operated on several times by the neurosurgeon for three American presidents (Bush Snr, Reagan, Johnson).
    I worked with a woman who was an intern for Bush Jnr in Texas, when he was the gov. He hosted an event for ex-presidents (organised by his father who'd left office a few years earlier) in the early 90s and so she got to meet 5 or 6 of them in one night. The Clintons also attended.

    I've always thought that was a monumentally cool story. But then I comment a lot on PB so I'm probably not a good barometer of 'coolness' :D
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    Anorak said:

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    One degree of separation, but I was operated on several times by the neurosurgeon for three American presidents (Bush Snr, Reagan, Johnson).
    I worked with a woman who was an intern for Bush Jnr in Texas, when he was the gov. He hosted an event for ex-presidents (organised by his father who'd left office a few years earlier) in the early 90s and so she got to meet 5 or 6 of them in one night. The Clintons also attended.

    I've always thought that was a monumentally cool story. But then I comment a lot on PB so I'm probably not a good barometer of 'coolness' :D
    You've also called yourself 'Anorak'.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,327
    edited October 2015
    Hat tip to @The_White_rabbit for pointing out the Iowa market a few days back. Hilary now 1-2 with Paddy Power (Iowa)
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    My mum had a face-lift performed by a Royal Warrant plastic surgeon. :wink:

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    One degree of separation, but I was operated on several times by the neurosurgeon for three American presidents (Bush Snr, Reagan, Johnson).
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,584
    edited October 2015

    Mr. Topping, I believe film invented the countdown to launches. If memory serves, a count-up used to occur, but they saw the films and decided countdowns were more exciting.

    But it is a count up. It's a negative number until the launch from which the mission begins and the clock continues to count up.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The Lucky Sperm Club seems pretty small in the US.
    felix said:

    Can't help thinking if her name was anything but Clinton she'd stand no chance, the Americans love a personality above anything else it seems.

    It's kind of like re-inventing the monarchy in a bad way.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall

    Hm. Not so sure, and I have bet accordingly. Too much attention is being focused on these early states. They give momentum and also losing badly may mean funders desert, but the likes of Jeb know the rich pickings, delegates-wise, are in later states such as Texas & Florida which come in March.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016 for a useful list.
    That was the Giuliani strategy in 2008 it was a disaster. If you do not win at least one of Iowa or NH you will not be nominee
    I don't think that's strictly true. You do, however, need to turn up and you do need to be in the game. Giuliani's mistake was that by not even competing in the early states, he wasn't talked about and lost credibility. In a field the size of the GOP's current one, you can finish third or fourth and keep going. It's a small run-in to Super Tuesday this time and money will still count heavily.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,316
    edited October 2015

    Anorak said:

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    One degree of separation, but I was operated on several times by the neurosurgeon for three American presidents (Bush Snr, Reagan, Johnson).
    I worked with a woman who was an intern for Bush Jnr in Texas, when he was the gov. He hosted an event for ex-presidents (organised by his father who'd left office a few years earlier) in the early 90s and so she got to meet 5 or 6 of them in one night. The Clintons also attended.

    I've always thought that was a monumentally cool story. But then I comment a lot on PB so I'm probably not a good barometer of 'coolness' :D
    You've also called yourself 'Anorak'.
    That's just cover. Like Clark Kent.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    No

    I was in the room with all of the leaders who attended the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in 1997
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,869

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466

    Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I met Bill briefly when he came over for a Labour event. He was affable and a strong personality: wasn't really long enough to get a firm view.

    On topic, Hillary did well, but I'm not sure it will help her ratings - having a whole day defending a difficult part of your record all over the network news is a hiding to nothing: if the net effect is zero it'll be a success. But it was a necessary hurdle to get past, and clearly she can't be accused of buckling under pressure.

    Quirky memory: when I was 10 and attending an American school in Vienna, we had a classroom Presidential debate for Kennedy vs Nixon in 1960, and I volunteered to put the pitch for Nixon (and won the vote). I'd read somewhere that Kennedy was more likely to be confrontational with the Soviets and Nixon might surprise us by being able to pursue detente as he couldn't be accused of being soft (as it eventually turned out with his China opening, I suppose).


  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    I'm backing down from nothing, you said earlier that Ukip would lose their deposit, as this is a site about betting I was merely enquiring what probability you see that as.

    There is clearly only 1 person backing down.

  • isamisam Posts: 24,352

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    What price they get more than 10%?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Good morning. Another day, and two more devolution agreements with the north east of England. Labour opposed. Tell me this- why do Labour seem to oppose everything now? I would've thought a devolution deal would give them a prime opportunity to test out their economic mantra on the local populous.

    Labour have an absolutely terrible record at all levels of government and the story of Devolution so far has seen a gradual undermining of their position in former heartlands (even before the Scottish awakening). The only exception to this is devolved London (not in performance but in that central governments influence offsets the failure of Labour and has led to the Labour vote avoiding the same slide its seen elsewhere).

    The last thing they want is a local focused party and/or the Greens and Tories to undermine their position in another heartland which would no doubt be using the AMS system.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    HYUFD said:

    Morning all.

    Based on last night’s local election results, the Meacher by-election should be V interesting.

    Do you think? Bad night for Labour but poor night for UKIP too. If the local by-elections are any guide then OW&R will be a comfortable Labour hold ahead of the Tories in second on a lowish turnout. There may well be a net swing to the Tories but Labour will spin that as the drop-off of Meacher's personal vote / UKIP voters 'going home'. I'm not sure either argument will hold too much water (how many Tory-inclined voters went for Meacher on a personal level? Were UKIP's voters really ex-Tory?) but once you're into that kind of detail the public's tuned out. Labour won't lose and won't come close to losing so whatever the underlying movements, the media will ignore it, as will politicians looking for a reason to.

    However, for psephological nerds, it could tell us a lot about the lie of the land going into next year's local and PCC elections.
    UKIP came second in the seat even in May when the Tories won a national majority. I expect both Labour and the Tories to lose vote share, Labour to hold but with their majority down, UKIP up
    Yes but UKIP have been down in every election and poll since the GE sometimes by quite large percentages. Haven't they lost all their defences since the GE, except for one hold? They have also lost their one Council.
    Labour win easily, Tories 2nd, UKIP third and saved deposit if they're lucky.
    No, they'll do better than that. There are still a lot of protest votes and this part of Oldham has a well-established and sizable populist-right section. I'd be surprised to see UKIP drop below 15%. I'd also expect more than three parties to save their deposits.
    How are more than three parties going to keep their deposits?

    At the GE the hated Liberals got 3.7% and the Greens 1.9%. Corbyn is definitely showing signs of squeezing the Greens and the hated Liberals are unlikely to find any purchase in this sort of area.
  • frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    edited October 2015
    One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker.
    (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)
  • Oldham West & Royton: Barring any special candidate-specific factors, maybe something like:

    Lab 45%
    UKIP 30%
    Con 15%
    LD 4%
    Others, loons, indies 6%
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. Penkridge, I skimmed a piece on that subject earlier. My reading was that Cameron lays one, and then all other political leaders lay theirs at the same time.
  • Oldham West & Royton: Barring any special candidate-specific factors, maybe something like:

    Lab 45%
    UKIP 30%
    Con 15%
    LD 4%
    Others, loons, indies 6%

    I think you are being too generous to UKIP. I get the impression that as an electoral force they are pretty much blown now that we are into the referendum campaign. Why would anyone (at least of those solely interested in the BOO result) vote for them now that there is no further pressure that can be brought to bear on Cameron to harden his position?

    I realise this is just me projecting my own views on the party but in spite of Corbyn's election I can't see UKIP really denting Labour chances.

  • I think you are being too generous to UKIP. I get the impression that as an electoral force they are pretty much blown now that we are into the referendum campaign. Why would anyone (at least of those solely interested in the BOO result) vote for them now that there is no further pressure that can be brought to bear on Cameron to harden his position?

    I realise this is just me projecting my own views on the party but in spite of Corbyn's election I can't see UKIP really denting Labour chances.

    Assuming that they pick a reasonable candidate who'll appeal to ex-Labour voters, I think they'll pick up a good chunk of protest votes, not really related to the EU other than via the immigration issue.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,208
    "Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?"

    I was in a New York traffic jam caused by Jimmy Carter's limousine and his cavalcade of outriders.....it doesn't get much more remote than that!

    Very OT. A thought........

    I mentioned 'Suffragettes' the other day a film I liked and an outstanding recreation of the period. But it was also a very harrowing tale of oppression and a fight for civil rights and like the classic American ones it was laid it on with a trowel. There were no male heroes!

    But what I didn't realize was that the director Sarah Gavron is the daughter of Nicky Gavron who if I remember was a firebrand London lefty. I very much liked the thought that the passion against injustice she would have learnt at home was all there in her film.


  • Mike's met Bill Clinton in the Oval Office.

    Robert's met Hillary Clinton.

    I once saw Donald Trump in London.

    Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?

    I met Bill briefly when he came over for a Labour event. He was affable and a strong personality: wasn't really long enough to get a firm view.

    On topic, Hillary did well, but I'm not sure it will help her ratings - having a whole day defending a difficult part of your record all over the network news is a hiding to nothing: if the net effect is zero it'll be a success. But it was a necessary hurdle to get past, and clearly she can't be accused of buckling under pressure.

    Quirky memory: when I was 10 and attending an American school in Vienna, we had a classroom Presidential debate for Kennedy vs Nixon in 1960, and I volunteered to put the pitch for Nixon (and won the vote). I'd read somewhere that Kennedy was more likely to be confrontational with the Soviets and Nixon might surprise us by being able to pursue detente as he couldn't be accused of being soft (as it eventually turned out with his China opening, I suppose).


    "if the net effect is zero it'll be a success. "

    I think you can get a mall positive if people marked your card in expectation of the event. This would be more markets than individuals' voting intentions, though.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492


    I think you are being too generous to UKIP. I get the impression that as an electoral force they are pretty much blown now that we are into the referendum campaign. Why would anyone (at least of those solely interested in the BOO result) vote for them now that there is no further pressure that can be brought to bear on Cameron to harden his position?

    I realise this is just me projecting my own views on the party but in spite of Corbyn's election I can't see UKIP really denting Labour chances.

    Assuming that they pick a reasonable candidate who'll appeal to ex-Labour voters, I think they'll pick up a good chunk of protest votes, not really related to the EU other than via the immigration issue.
    I know nothing of the constituency, a year ago Ukip would have had a real chance of coming close to winning a Northern seat as exemplified in Heywood, but the party has lost its mojo and direction for various reasons.

  • ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,324
    edited October 2015
    Roger said:



    I mentioned 'Suffragettes' the other day a film I liked and an outstanding recreation of the period. But it was also a very harrowing tale of oppression and a fight for civil rights and like the classic American ones it was laid it on with a trowel. There were no male heroes!

    I must go and have a lie down....I actually agree with something Roger says!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517
    @MichaelLCrick: Ukip's Chairman in Oldham is Joe Fitzpatrick who used to be Phil Woolas's agent in the seat next to coming by-election

    Can we guess what the campaign might look like?
  • CromwellCromwell Posts: 236
    HYUFD said:

    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall

    ===============
    I doubt it ; she will surely be the Dem candidate and the early favorite but this time next year I expect the republicans to be surging to victory ....Hillary doesn't have the benefit of incumbency and after two Democratic terms the odds favour a Republican .Futhermore , Hillary has such a smug , preening sense of entitlement that will surely tempt fate ; she is a very devisive figure that generates both love and hate and the very thought of her and Bill back in the Whitehouse will turn many voters off ...she reminds me of an aging actress or rock star who cannot accept that she is just not wanted anymore ; rather like Madonna prancing around on the stage like she did thirty years ago
    I suspect that she will be defeated by a young dynamic Republican from a hard scrabble background who can match her in debates ; indeed it is ironic that the traditional roles could be reversed and instead of a rich white establishment Republican being matched against a young charasmatic Democrat you may instead have a rich white establishment Hillary being defeated by a Kenedy-esque Republican by the name of MARCO RUBIO !

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,324
    edited October 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @MichaelLCrick: Ukip's Chairman in Oldham is Joe Fitzpatrick who used to be Phil Woolas's agent in the seat next to coming by-election

    Can we guess what the campaign might look like?

    Promote making the whities calm and happy?
  • Cromwell said:

    HYUFD said:

    Clinton v Trump seems most likely. Even if Carson wins Iowa Trump should be second and then win New Hampshire. Sanders may win New Hampshire but Hillary will win overall

    ===============
    I doubt it ; she will surely be the Dem candidate and the early favorite but this time next year I expect the republicans to be surging to victory ....Hillary doesn't have the benefit of incumbency and after two Democratic terms the odds favour a Republican .Futhermore , Hillary has such a smug , preening sense of entitlement that will surely tempt fate ; she is a very devisive figure that generates both love and hate and the very thought of her and Bill back in the Whitehouse will turn many voters off ...she reminds me of an aging actress or rock star who cannot accept that she is just not wanted anymore ; rather like Madonna prancing around on the stage like she did thirty years ago
    I suspect that she will be defeated by a young dynamic Republican from a hard scrabble background who can match her in debates ; indeed it is ironic that the traditional roles could be reversed and instead of a rich white establishment Republican being matched against a young charasmatic Democrat you may instead have a rich white establishment Hillary being defeated by a Kenedy-esque Republican by the name of MARCO RUBIO !

    I don't think HYUFD was expressing an opinion on the outcome of Clinton v Trump, just that ultimately Clinton would beat Sanders to the nomination.
  • I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker.

    Ho ho, love that deadpan humour.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited October 2015

    ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.

    I sold a box of cigars to a 20 something American girl in the late 90's. Nice dress.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    isam said:

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    What price they get more than 10%?
    Still waiting, still nothing...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,280
    isam said:
    what are we looking at here? A protestor breaks through the police cordon, runs towards or stands close to some protected people and gets tackled by the police?

    Am I supposed to be outraged at the civil liberties violation? Or impressed by the efficiency of the police?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited October 2015
    Does the Labour Party have Fridays off..only one member on the opposition benches for the defence debate..
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:
    what are we looking at here? A protestor breaks through the police cordon, runs towards or stands close to some protected people and gets tackled by the police?

    Am I supposed to be outraged at the civil liberties violation? Or impressed by the efficiency of the police?
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    Can't help thinking if her name was anything but Clinton she'd stand no chance, the Americans love a personality above anything else it seems.

    To be fair, she made her name alongside Bill, so it's not like the Bushes or the Kennedys. Well, not yet at least.
  • I might have to watch I'm a celebrity this year

    I'm a Celebrity attempts to lure anti-Corbyn MPs into jungle

    Copeland MP Jamie Reed rejects offer to appear on reality TV show but speculation swirls around Simon Danczuk

    http://bit.ly/1LR7FJG
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.

    I've met Chelsea Clinton, seen John McCain in person and saw Barack Obama being driven by in "the Beast".
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637

    One of the controversial issues discussed last night was the shortening of the cenotaph ceremony with Cameron laying the only political wreath. I suggest that a solution nobody could possibly object to is have the wreath laid by the Speaker.
    (Also, how about raising tax on sugary products one at a time, budget by budget, finishing, in about 50 year's time with plain chocolate digestive biscuits?)

    The Prime Minister represents the country as a whole, regardless of what party he or she comes from.

    Why are people trying to make political capital out of this?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,409
    Mr 63,

    Amazing that with 300,000,000 Americans to choose from, the surname Bush and Clinton dominates politics. And not just the name - they are sons, brothers and wives.

    At least North Korea is honest about its nepotism
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637

    ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.

    My wife used to go jogging with Chelsea from time to time, and saw Hillary a few times in California. Quite liked the former (although full of herself) - the latter was an impressive speaker, but a really cold fish personally.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Charles said:

    ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.

    My wife used to go jogging with Chelsea from time to time, and saw Hillary a few times in California. Quite liked the former (although full of herself) - the latter was an impressive speaker, but a really cold fish personally.
    Charles said:

    ""Any other PBers met any US Presidents or nominees for POTUS?""

    Nearest would be Chelsea Clinton and brewing up cups of coffee for the lad in the security detail that waited in the porter's lodge while she walked around the college lake.

    My wife used to go jogging with Chelsea from time to time, and saw Hillary a few times in California. Quite liked the former (although full of herself) - the latter was an impressive speaker, but a really cold fish personally.
    That was also my experience of Chelsea Clinton.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,280
    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:
    what are we looking at here? A protestor breaks through the police cordon, runs towards or stands close to some protected people and gets tackled by the police?

    Am I supposed to be outraged at the civil liberties violation? Or impressed by the efficiency of the police?
    The police will have allocated an area for all the protesters for and against.

    This one left that area, put herself in close proximity to let's call them high value targets and was then removed by the police.

    What on earth is the problem?
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    edited October 2015
    CD13 said:

    Mr 63,

    Amazing that with 300,000,000 Americans to choose from, the surname Bush and Clinton dominates politics. And not just the name - they are sons, brothers and wives.

    At least North Korea is honest about its nepotism

    I'll admit I don't follow US politics but the debates look more like X factor

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,280
    edited October 2015
    Watching QT.

    re steel.

    People are morons.

    (Edit: Farage talking sense. Agree with him or not.)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367
    England once again relying on Cook and Root. If one of them fail they are in serious trouble.

    Ali is a great number 8. He is not an opener.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    Why would UKIP lose 75% of their vote? The party's currently polling the teens.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,327
    Offtopic - Should I buy a Volkswagen now just so I can claim it all back when I get the missold TDI calls :D ?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,409
    I've never met a President but I did ask directions once from Peter Ustinov when I was in London. Very affable, but he didn't recognise me.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    CD13 said:

    Mr 63,

    Amazing that with 300,000,000 Americans to choose from, the surname Bush and Clinton dominates politics. And not just the name - they are sons, brothers and wives.

    At least North Korea is honest about its nepotism

    Given Bush's floundering, there's obviously a limit to how far nepotism takes you.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,869
    Sean_F said:

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    Why would UKIP lose 75% of their vote? The party's currently polling the teens.
    The bet that was proposed to me was whether I thought UKIP would go from 20% to less than 5% and I turned it down as I thought it unlikely. As you say they are polling better than that, they may only lose 25% of their vote.
    However I suspect that voters will pile in behind the party that is seen as the main challenger, and I predict that that will be the Tories.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488

    Sean_F said:

    @HYUFD Re: Oldham West & Royton.
    You said the Tories were "nowhere" in this seat. I can't let you get away with that:
    UKIP 20.6%
    Tories 19%

    Mr song, what price will you offer me Ukip keeping their deposit in Oldham?

    Ah, backing down and changing the subject!
    Sorry but I think it quite likely that UKIP will only lose 75% of their vote and end up with a deposit saving 5%, so no thanks.
    Why would UKIP lose 75% of their vote? The party's currently polling the teens.
    The bet that was proposed to me was whether I thought UKIP would go from 20% to less than 5% and I turned it down as I thought it unlikely. As you say they are polling better than that, they may only lose 25% of their vote.
    However I suspect that voters will pile in behind the party that is seen as the main challenger, and I predict that that will be the Tories.
    I'm not sure this is a seat where people will "pile in" as I doubt if Labour are especially unpopular here.

    I'd expect something like Labour 45, UKIP 25, Con 20 here, but everyones' vote well down on the GE total.
  • I might have to watch I'm a celebrity this year

    I'm a Celebrity attempts to lure anti-Corbyn MPs into jungle

    Copeland MP Jamie Reed rejects offer to appear on reality TV show but speculation swirls around Simon Danczuk

    http://bit.ly/1LR7FJG

    I'd much rather see the lovely Karen in the jungle.
  • Leanne Wood was unimpressive on R4Today prog this AM. Starts off laying into Welsh Labour failings then gets diverted to chasing the anti-austerity vote and sees Corbyn as useful force to ally with her... which defeats the point of presenting Plaid as diffiferent to Labour. Dear Leanne, one main reason the SNP did so well is because they looked a competent alternative to SLAB and Plaid needs to replicate that.
  • Hillary's health may well come into play.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''Leanne Wood was unimpressive on R4Today prog this AM. ''

    Nobody ever seems to call Leanne out on the central contradiction of her position.

    Welsh independence would need an austerity that makes what is going on in Greece look like a picnic.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Which paper's readership matches how Britons actually vote? None. Most are miles off. But @thesun looks closest... https://t.co/dzLaNiP772
  • sladeslade Posts: 569
    Never met an American president. The nearest I came was J.K. Galbraith who came to Durham in the 1960s to give a lecture. The only thing I can remember is this immensely tall figure sprawling in an armchair in the staff room.
  • From this week's Popbitch email.
    Not that I'm speculating.

    >> Big Questions <<
    Who's asking what this week?

    Which out-of-favour Labour MP
    seemed to enjoy the unexpected
    amount of free time he had at
    the party conference by behaving
    a little indiscreetly with a
    very pretty, curvy lady who
    most certainly wasn't his wife?
Sign In or Register to comment.