Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Terror casts a shadow over the race for the White House

245

Comments

  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited September 2016
    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    edited September 2016

    Antidisestablishmentarianism is longer than amanuensis.

    Yes but a lot of this site is devoted to floccinaucinihilipilification.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited September 2016
    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    If he is specific about the tax increases then that's fair enough. The LDs did run for a whole Parliament with a policy of a penny on income tax to fund education, did they not?

    If he's not specific though, then his policy is no better than Ed Miliband and Ed Balls' magic money tree, and we say how that went down a year ago.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Guido
    Tom Watson wants to reduce the number of Labour supporters who vote in party elections. It's Corbyns enemies who want a new electorate.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    Well, we will see if the Lib Dems start talking about a bonus tax and spend it 6-8 times over. Only then will they be ready to take over Labour's centre left position.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819
    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
    To be honest i'm not sure they have another option. Pitching for the orange book/osbornite ecodry/soclib types is the other option, but Farron is the wrong leader for that anyway. Also not sure there's enough of those votes available yet - May will be careful to not veer too hard to the right and risk losing those votes.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    The Lib Dem position on Referendum 2: Refer Harder is a mountain of stupidity.

    For us to have a firm deal that can be voted upon, we need to have invoked Article 50 and for a deal to be hammered out.

    At that stage, if we decline the deal, we leave on WTO terms. From a Lib Dem perspective, that's undoubtedly a bad thing (because the yellows are committing themselves to loving the EU).

    So, what's the point? The choices will only be to leave on fully-detached or slightly less-detached terms.

    It is the wankiest of all worlds.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    PlatoSaid said:

    Guido
    Tom Watson wants to reduce the number of Labour supporters who vote in party elections. It's Corbyns enemies who want a new electorate.

    Is this enough popcorn for the Labour conference?
    image
  • HYUFD said:

    Clinton presently leads by only 3.7% with RCP in Colorado though and with Trump ahead in Florida, Ohio and lowa and less than 1% behind in Nevada and North Carolina if he wins Colorado too he would win the presidency even without Pennsylvania. However with Hillary's national RCP lead at just 0.9% Trump could well win the popular vote but lose the electoral college by a very narrow margin because Hillary holds Colorado and Pennsylvania

    Nate Silver recently had a post coming to the opposite conclusion. The problem with the RCP averages is that there are less state polls so these averages lag the national picture.

    For example, in Wisconsin, the RCP average has Clinton +5.3 but this is based on 2 polls in August and 1 in June. If there had been more recently polling, we would have expected this state to tighten as well. Nate Silver adjusts all the swing states in line with the national polls so he has Clinton +3.8 in Wisconsin on his polls only forecast.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
    To be honest i'm not sure they have another option. Pitching for the orange book/osbornite ecodry/soclib types is the other option, but Farron is the wrong leader for that anyway. Also not sure there's enough of those votes available yet - May will be careful to not veer too hard to the right and risk losing those votes.
    And, many many years ago, the 'extra penny for education' was not only one of the party's most popular policies, but often the only one people could remember and identify with the LibDems. The LibDems are still at first base as far as national recovery is concerned, and their first challenge is getting noticed amongst all the noise coming from a barely united government, Labour's never-ending-shambles and more competitors for third party than ever before.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    For tweeters here

    From today, Twitter is cutting back on what types of content will use up its 140-character limit.

    Now, @names in replies, media attachments (like photos, GIFs, videos, and polls) and quoted Tweets will no longer be counted against the valuable 140 characters that make up a tweet. This allows for richer public conversations that are easier to follow on Twitter and ensures people can attach media to tweets without sacrificing the characters they have to express themselves.

    https://blog.bufferapp.com/longer-tweets-coming-twitter?utm_content=buffer8b0cc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819

    vik said:

    Nate Silver has previously commented on how Trump does better in Internet polls vs telephone polls.

    We saw the same pattern in the Brexit polling, where Telephone polling favoured Remain & was less accurate than Internet polling. The reasons are the same: Leave supporters and Trump supporters are called racists by the Mass Media, so the supporters are only willing to express their true feelings in an online survey.

    I'm expecting the Internet polls to be more accurate in the US presidential election.

    Perhaps, though it is also true that internet polls have tended to favour anti-establishment candidates. Is Trump the American Brexit or this year's Ron Paul?
    I'd say the American Brexit. So far the campaigns are following the eUref pattern pretty closely. For me, the key differences between Trump & Brexit so far are:

    - Brexit is (or was perceived as) more economically risky but less 'taboo' than Trump. Says to me, that a) people who vote GOP for their wallet, or who are unlikely to be targeted by Trump (middle class white republicans) are not that likely to switch to Dems even if they dont really support Trumps policies, and b) a lot of Shy Trumpets (more even than shy leavers). Both favour Trump

    - Brexit had a small but important group of 'Globalist Brexiteer' types - most of this forum's leavers for example - if that group made up just 5% of the electorate it was the winning 5% for leave. I don't see any equivalent for Trump, the Dan Hannan types are all for Hillary - so advantage Clinton

    - Electoral College system - seems like the democrats have an inbuilt advantage as it stands. means it's not just a case of winning the national vote, so Trump could win that and still lose.

    If I had to guess I would give a 51-49% victory for Trump in the national vote, and a small win in the electoral college.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    The Skittles analogy used to be M&Ms until Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin then people posting the meme started using skittles instead as Trayvon had been carrying Skittles.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819
    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
  • Miss Plato, those changes make sense. A while ago I (with Jo Zebedee) did a book launch event on Twitter, and a slight problem was when various people replied to one thread of conversation. Even with a short hashtag (#JoThad), the multiple usernames meant tweets had to be about half their usual size.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Guido
    Tom Watson wants to reduce the number of Labour supporters who vote in party elections. It's Corbyns enemies who want a new electorate.

    Is this enough popcorn for the Labour conference?
    image
    I honestly can't detect parody from reality with Labour now. The US election is going the same way - with two months to go.

    What interesting times.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited September 2016
    The Dalai Lama spoke to the European Parliament yesterday which has provoked an angry response in Beijing. Which ironically may make the Chinese look a little more favorably towards London
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    Alistair said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    The Skittles analogy used to be M&Ms until Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin then people posting the meme started using skittles instead as Trayvon had been carrying Skittles.
    wow. another racist meme from the trumps. what a surprise!

    collective punishment is never a good idea and goes against western ideals imo.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
    To be honest i'm not sure they have another option. Pitching for the orange book/osbornite ecodry/soclib types is the other option, but Farron is the wrong leader for that anyway. Also not sure there's enough of those votes available yet - May will be careful to not veer too hard to the right and risk losing those votes.
    Indeed targeting a few Labour voters is now better for the LDs now than targeting Tories
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
  • Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Guido
    Tom Watson wants to reduce the number of Labour supporters who vote in party elections. It's Corbyns enemies who want a new electorate.

    Is this enough popcorn for the Labour conference?
    image
    LOL. But no, barely covers the first day.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Alistair said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    The Skittles analogy used to be M&Ms until Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin then people posting the meme started using skittles instead as Trayvon had been carrying Skittles.
    Yes, I know. As I said, this is truly the meme election. So far we've had the alt-right, pepe the frog and now skittles. Who would have thought that a bunch of bored teenagers on /pol/ would have so much influence.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    And Hillary blinks

    Fox
    Hillary Clinton calls for "tough vetting" and "a better visa system" following this weekend's terror attacks https://t.co/JDIdIgGPtf
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    And Hillary blinks

    Fox
    Hillary Clinton calls for "tough vetting" and "a better visa system" following this weekend's terror attacks https://t.co/JDIdIgGPtf
    That is honestly the first sign I've seen from the Clinton camp that they are now in it to win it. Liberal posturing against Trump has gotten them nowhere.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW
  • John McTernan, in Telegraph:

    "It is important to remember that Labour is not now and has never been a socialist party."

    In a nutshell, the civil war that is engulfing Labour.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
    To be honest i'm not sure they have another option. Pitching for the orange book/osbornite ecodry/soclib types is the other option, but Farron is the wrong leader for that anyway. Also not sure there's enough of those votes available yet - May will be careful to not veer too hard to the right and risk losing those votes.
    Indeed targeting a few Labour voters is now better for the LDs now than targeting Tories
    If May gets pushed towards hard Brexit by these new Tory pressure groups, then the LibDems are already well positioned for the more moderate Tories.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW

    Ka-Pow!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    MaxPB said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    And Hillary blinks

    Fox
    Hillary Clinton calls for "tough vetting" and "a better visa system" following this weekend's terror attacks https://t.co/JDIdIgGPtf
    That is honestly the first sign I've seen from the Clinton camp that they are now in it to win it. Liberal posturing against Trump has gotten them nowhere.
    And how does she respond to the charge "So why haven't you done it for the past 8 years in Govt. then Hillary?"
  • PlatoSaid said:

    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW

    Hillary’s disdain for large swathes of Americans will keep coming back to bite her on the arse.
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    On the other hand, Trump is more likely to come up with some off-the-cuff zinger that floors Clinton and plunges her whole campaign into crisis somehow. I hope not. Certainly be required viewing, shame it is so late at night.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Wow

    Just seen footage on Sky of rat and dog that's had spinal cord refused and mobile again.

    Amazing.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW

    Harsh, but it's true.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited September 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW

    Hillary’s disdain for large swathes of Americans will keep coming back to bite her on the arse.
    It's an amazing zinger from Trump - and dead right. Hillary's spent so much time parading illegal immigrants and liberal posturing, she's totally misread the public mood - and her media cronies haven't helped a jot by arguing about the meaning of 'terrorist' or 'bomb'.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited September 2016
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    And how does she respond to the charge "So why haven't you done it for the past 8 years in Govt. then Hillary?"

    Well the issue is that her current policy is to increase the number of migrants, hopefully she is preparing the ground to reduce that and either stick to the 110k pledged by Obama or go lower still.
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    It makes Clinton "Deplorables" comment even more stupid. If she stuck to the high ground when Trump does some offensive comment she could say well that I don't resort to that level, I am serious candidate etc etc etc....
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC reports today Farron will propose higher taxes to pay for the NHS and a merger of the NHS and social care and a scrapping of primary school SATS. Combined with his commitment to hold a referendum on the Brexit terms he is clearly pitching for moderate social democratic Labour voters who voted for Ed Miliband but for whom Corbyn is too hard Left

    One gets the sense that Farron has never seen a tax that he doesn't like.

    Even if he is pitching to that vote, is it sufficiently concentrated to allow them to win seats? That seems challenging.
    There are a few seats like Cambridge and Twickenham where that vote could be crucial. With the LDs down to just 8 seats even 2 or 3 gains would at least get them into double figures
    To be honest i'm not sure they have another option. Pitching for the orange book/osbornite ecodry/soclib types is the other option, but Farron is the wrong leader for that anyway. Also not sure there's enough of those votes available yet - May will be careful to not veer too hard to the right and risk losing those votes.
    Indeed targeting a few Labour voters is now better for the LDs now than targeting Tories
    If May gets pushed towards hard Brexit by these new Tory pressure groups, then the LibDems are already well positioned for the more moderate Tories.
    Not really, the party of EUphillia will not appeal to Tory voters who voted remain.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited September 2016
    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Holy crap video

    Trump goes for the jugular

    Fox
    Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton talks tougher about my supporters than she does about Islamic terrorists https://t.co/iemw2kGwdW

    Hillary’s disdain for large swathes of Americans will keep coming back to bite her on the arse.
    It's an amazing zinger from Trump - and dead right. Hillary's spent so much time parading illegal immigrants and liberal posturing, she's totally misread the public mood - and her media cronies haven't helped a jot by arguing about the meaning of 'terrorist' or 'bomb'.
    I don't really get attempted big outcry over Trump calling a bomb a bomb. Do we honestly think a billionaire New Yorker, who has secret service 24/7 won't have been informed that it was a bomb straight away?

    The US media are making the mistake with Trump as with Farage. Everything he says has to be an outcry, a disgrace, etc. But then people start to say but he was right on this point...
  • Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Don't go quoting actual numbers at her, they're part of the "MSM conspiracy"
  • Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Guido
    Tom Watson wants to reduce the number of Labour supporters who vote in party elections. It's Corbyns enemies who want a new electorate.

    Is this enough popcorn for the Labour conference?
    image
    "I'm sick and tired of popcorn!!!" :lol:
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2016

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    It makes Clinton "Deplorables" comment even more stupid. If she stuck to the high ground when Trump does some offensive comment she could say well that I don't resort to that level, I am serious candidate etc etc etc....
    At this stage of the presidential race, Clinton is nowhere near where she had hoped to be. She knows how damaging the health issue was for her and needed to shift the narrative, but as with so many politicians before her, she has merely opened another line of attack that could turn out to be every bit as unhelpful.

    Clinton should by now be presenting herself as Presidential, a safe pair of hands able to lead America, instead she looks haggard and sounds like a bitter third rater.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Example of Trump ad aimed at black Dems vote

    https://t.co/BNOsGSzpkx

    8 years of birther conspiracy makes this a non starter.

    its aimed at traditional educated republicans who hate racists. even so, doubt that would work
    As I said, I doubt your nous here - and your very strong opinions render any point you make irrelevant as it's too coloured by personal bias.
    Self-awareness, much?
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    It makes Clinton "Deplorables" comment even more stupid. If she stuck to the high ground when Trump does some offensive comment she could say well that I don't resort to that level, I am serious candidate etc etc etc....
    At this stage of the presidential race, Clinton is nowhere near where she had hoped to be. She knows how damaging the health issue was for her and needed to shift the narrative, but as with so many politicians before her, she has merely opened another line of attack that could turn out to be every bit as unhelpful.

    Clinton should by now be presenting herself as Presidential, a safe pair of hands able to lead American, instead she looks haggard and sounds like a bitter third rater.
    The health scare again was so badly handled. Desperately lying and spinning from the outset. Played right that could have got her sympathy, instead even Democrats were going what are you doing...When they finally got the "powering through" spin out there it was too late, everybody had heard what the Clinton campaign had said and been able to match it with the video, and then Clinton lied again....
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    I think Trump's Achilles heel is his braggart manner. That just totally undermines any sensible point he wants to make. I'm thinking a thread reviewing his performances during the primaries is overdue.

    He took down over a dozen experienced campaigners - Hillary just had Bernie and scraped it.

    He's very good at seeing a weakness and exploiting it. Also wondering if Farage is assisting at all. GOP/Trumpism is a bit rich for his blood - but his style won a lot of votes here, that may appeal to the more middle-ish GOPs in the US.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    They'all be tweeting that irrespective of what Trump actually says in the debate. Trump's job is to make those accusations seem absurd by not making it personal and keeping to his script. Good luck to those preparing him though, not an easy job!!
  • MaxPB said:
    That's brilliant thanks. I like the 750-watt power supply: IM (not very strong) E the biggest issue in upgrading a PC is not available slots, but power supply. Given the 10-series Nvidia cards are less power-hungry than their predecessors, it should mean there's plenty to spare.

    I might also up the HD to 1TB, though I envisage most of my 'ordinary' day-to-day tasks will be done on my old PC - this will be purely for gaming. Gone are the days I needed a PC that I could wipe regularly for work. :(

    Also like the i7 :)

    One thing I might change is the case: I've always quit liked large full cases rather than midi/mini ones, though I'm not sure that size is really needed now external drives are so available and capacious. Any thoughts about case size, especially wrt cooling?

    Again, thanks. Much appreciated.
  • Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    MaxPB said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    And Hillary blinks

    Fox
    Hillary Clinton calls for "tough vetting" and "a better visa system" following this weekend's terror attacks https://t.co/JDIdIgGPtf
    That is honestly the first sign I've seen from the Clinton camp that they are now in it to win it. Liberal posturing against Trump has gotten them nowhere.
    The Liberal posturing has been designed to get Bernie's dreamers back on board. Only a few contrarians amongst his erstwhile supporters would vote for Trump but the much bigger risk is that they do not vote at all.

    The truth is that Clinton is boringly centralist on most things, probably a bit more of a Cameroon than a Blairite. In having to portray herself as more liberal than she is she has given Trump opportunities. At the debates she needs to get back to her centralist positions to establish the safe pair of hands meme.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762

    Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf

    A Crossman diary style memoir would be interesting.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    DavidL said:

    Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf

    A Crossman diary style memoir would be interesting.
    The detail of his notes goes some to way to explain the reported eight figure advance he's been promised for the memoir.
  • DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    And Hillary blinks

    Fox
    Hillary Clinton calls for "tough vetting" and "a better visa system" following this weekend's terror attacks https://t.co/JDIdIgGPtf
    That is honestly the first sign I've seen from the Clinton camp that they are now in it to win it. Liberal posturing against Trump has gotten them nowhere.
    The Liberal posturing has been designed to get Bernie's dreamers back on board. Only a few contrarians amongst his erstwhile supporters would vote for Trump but the much bigger risk is that they do not vote at all.

    The truth is that Clinton is boringly centralist on most things, probably a bit more of a Cameroon than a Blairite. In having to portray herself as more liberal than she is she has given Trump opportunities. At the debates she needs to get back to her centralist positions to establish the safe pair of hands meme.
    I think Clinton is to the Left of Cameron.

    She strikes me as Cherie Blair, running as a mixture of Yvette Cooper and Gordon Brown.
  • DavidL said:

    Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf

    A Crossman diary style memoir would be interesting.
    I think the entries from February 2016 regarding Boris backing Leave will be fascinating.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    Wow

    Just seen footage on Sky of rat and dog that's had spinal cord refused and mobile again.

    Amazing.

    Hmmm ...

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2106382-head-transplant-teams-new-animal-tests-fail-to-convince-critics/

    I'm also rather curious about why the group doing this work is talking about head transplants: surely helping paraplegics et al to regain movement in their own bodies is a much better aim?

    A pure guess: do damaged nerves regrow in such a way that this technique will not work a short period after the injury? That certainly happened with my ankle, where all the Prof could eventually do was remove the nerve (sural, I think) which had become a knotted mass after many years and operations.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    It makes Clinton "Deplorables" comment even more stupid. If she stuck to the high ground when Trump does some offensive comment she could say well that I don't resort to that level, I am serious candidate etc etc etc....
    At this stage of the presidential race, Clinton is nowhere near where she had hoped to be. She knows how damaging the health issue was for her and needed to shift the narrative, but as with so many politicians before her, she has merely opened another line of attack that could turn out to be every bit as unhelpful.

    Clinton should by now be presenting herself as Presidential, a safe pair of hands able to lead American, instead she looks haggard and sounds like a bitter third rater.
    The health scare again was so badly handled. Desperately lying and spinning from the outset. Played right that could have got her sympathy, instead even Democrats were going what are you doing...When they finally got the "powering through" spin out there it was too late, everybody had heard what the Clinton campaign had said and been able to match it with the video, and then Clinton lied again....
    It was so stupid. 6 others in her office had had pneumonia apparently.

    If she'd said - I've a bug that's going about and being treated for it, but I really wanted to attend the 911 memorial for a little bit to show my respect - she'd no PR problem.
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    But that's of limited profitability for Clinton because so many people find her nasty as well.

    Trump's main task should be to reassure female voters (so criticising Clinton is ok so long as it doesn't roll over into misogynism)

    If he can get that balance right, he wins.
  • DavidL said:

    Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf

    A Crossman diary style memoir would be interesting.
    Apparently, Crossman's diaries were an acknowledged source for the highly successful TV comedy series Yes Minister. You may have heard of it?
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    It makes Clinton "Deplorables" comment even more stupid. If she stuck to the high ground when Trump does some offensive comment she could say well that I don't resort to that level, I am serious candidate etc etc etc....
    At this stage of the presidential race, Clinton is nowhere near where she had hoped to be. She knows how damaging the health issue was for her and needed to shift the narrative, but as with so many politicians before her, she has merely opened another line of attack that could turn out to be every bit as unhelpful.

    Clinton should by now be presenting herself as Presidential, a safe pair of hands able to lead American, instead she looks haggard and sounds like a bitter third rater.
    The health scare again was so badly handled. Desperately lying and spinning from the outset. Played right that could have got her sympathy, instead even Democrats were going what are you doing...When they finally got the "powering through" spin out there it was too late, everybody had heard what the Clinton campaign had said and been able to match it with the video, and then Clinton lied again....
    On the subject of sympathy, anyone else reminded of that episode of "Whoops apocalypse" where one campaign team has their candidate shot to gain sympathy, only for the ambulance taking him to ER to run over his opponent?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited September 2016

    MaxPB said:
    That's brilliant thanks. I like the 750-watt power supply: IM (not very strong) E the biggest issue in upgrading a PC is not available slots, but power supply. Given the 10-series Nvidia cards are less power-hungry than their predecessors, it should mean there's plenty to spare.

    I might also up the HD to 1TB, though I envisage most of my 'ordinary' day-to-day tasks will be done on my old PC - this will be purely for gaming. Gone are the days I needed a PC that I could wipe regularly for work. :(

    Also like the i7 :)

    One thing I might change is the case: I've always quit liked large full cases rather than midi/mini ones, though I'm not sure that size is really needed now external drives are so available and capacious. Any thoughts about case size, especially wrt cooling?

    Again, thanks. Much appreciated.
    You can have an additional standard HDD in there as well for media storage, 500GB is usually enough for the OS and any games you have installed.

    A full tower case is fine as well, but I would stick with the midi one, they take up less room and with the new large fans there is less need for huge towers. The system shouldn't run that hot anyway, the 1070 is fairly decent for power draw and the i7 is now on the final revision which makes it very cool.

    No worries though, I like when people get on the PC gaming train! One like this will take you through to 2020 IMO before you need to upgrade the GPU, 2021 if you get the 1080.
  • Ishmael_X said:

    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    A twitter poll? LOL
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    edited September 2016
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just seen the Trump skittles poster advert. Truly this is the meme election. Still quite a powerful message and hits Hillary on her 200,000 Syrian migrants pledge. If she doesn't drop that before the next debate Trump is going to eviscerate her, hopefully her campaign staff have the sense to make the announcement to reduce from 110k to 55k the number of refugees that will come over and to use the Canadian solution of women and children only with no chance of family reunions. Those are the terms, take it or leave it.

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    Clinton just doesn't get it. A Washington DC Juncker?

    My gut tells me Trump wins this because she is making all the mistakes of the Remain campaign, and worse, and I can't recall a democratic candidate I've disliked more. If I feel like that, on this side of the Atlantic, then how the hell is she going down in the US?

    It's a sign.

    Say what you like about Cameron (and I have) at least he recognised he was losing in the final weeks, and realised the problem - even if he felt trapped by the campaign and that he could do nothing about it.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    I think Trump's Achilles heel is his braggart manner. That just totally undermines any sensible point he wants to make. I'm thinking a thread reviewing his performances during the primaries is overdue.

    He took down over a dozen experienced campaigners - Hillary just had Bernie and scraped it.

    He's very good at seeing a weakness and exploiting it. Also wondering if Farage is assisting at all. GOP/Trumpism is a bit rich for his blood - but his style won a lot of votes here, that may appeal to the more middle-ish GOPs in the US.
    Farage couldn't get himself elected.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Ishmael_X said:

    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    A twitter poll? LOL
    All I could find. Be helpful and post a proper one instead of lolling about it.
  • Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    A twitter poll? LOL
    All I could find. Be helpful and post a proper one instead of lolling about it.
    Commander-in-Chief Forum and upcoming debates

    71% of registered voters heard something about or watched the Commander-in-Chief Forum on NBC News

    42% of these voters say Clinton did better, while 40% say Donald Trump did better

    https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/13/yougoveconomist-poll-september-10-13-2016/
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    snip

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?
    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    Clinton just doesn't get it. A Washington DC Juncker?

    My gut tells me Trump wins this because she is making all the mistakes of the Remain campaign, and worse, and I can't recall am democratic candidate I've disliked more. If I feel like that, on this side of the Atlantic, the how the hell is she going down in the US?

    It's a sign.

    Say what you like about Cameron (and I have) at least he recognised he was losing in the final weeks, and realised the problem - even if he felt trapped by the campaign and that he could do nothing about it.
    Cameron's Number 10 address two days before the vote was a dead giveaway.

    That Obama is pleading with blacks to vote for Hillary - because they voted for him and he's black makes no sense. And if you don't vote for Hillary, you're sexist...

    It's the most bizarre messaging. I honestly can't see where they're going. I read dozens of tweets/articles from both sides and Team Hillary are doing a terrible job of this. It's very Remain - full of name calling and snobby destain.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    A twitter poll? LOL
    All I could find. Be helpful and post a proper one instead of lolling about it.
    Commander-in-Chief Forum and upcoming debates

    71% of registered voters heard something about or watched the Commander-in-Chief Forum on NBC News

    42% of these voters say Clinton did better, while 40% say Donald Trump did better

    https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/13/yougoveconomist-poll-september-10-13-2016/
    Thank you!
  • I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    619 said:

    MaxPB said:

    snip

    nope. she needs to counter attack the message and not give in to his racist horse trading. The usa bombed syria, they have to help look after their regugees
    That's how to lose an election. Better to compromise and win than virtue signal and lose.
    Depends - if it comes across as insincere (like Labour's immigration mugs last election) then it only has the effect of angering her own supporters without convincing the opponents. A climbdown says she recognizes that less is the way to go with refugees - so why vote for Hillary's 55k when you can have Trump's 0?

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.
    Clinton just doesn't get it. A Washington DC Juncker?

    My gut tells me Trump wins this because she is making all the mistakes of the Remain campaign, and worse, and I can't recall am democratic candidate I've disliked more. If I feel like that, on this side of the Atlantic, the how the hell is she going down in the US?

    It's a sign.

    Say what you like about Cameron (and I have) at least he recognised he was losing in the final weeks, and realised the problem - even if he felt trapped by the campaign and that he could do nothing about it.
    Cameron's Number 10 address two days before the vote was a dead giveaway.

    That Obama is pleading with blacks to vote for Hillary - because they voted for him and he's black makes no sense. And if you don't vote for Hillary, you're sexist...

    It's the most bizarre messaging. I honestly can't see where they're going. I read dozens of tweets/articles from both sides and Team Hillary are doing a terrible job of this. It's very Remain - full of name calling and snobby destain.
    I think you mean disdain.

    Destain was something that would have got her husband out of being impeached!
  • I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.

    Makes a change from them howling at the moon
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Alistair said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    "Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
    "

    She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
    Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NBCNews/status/773690322471747584?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    A twitter poll? LOL
    All I could find. Be helpful and post a proper one instead of lolling about it.
    Commander-in-Chief Forum and upcoming debates

    71% of registered voters heard something about or watched the Commander-in-Chief Forum on NBC News

    42% of these voters say Clinton did better, while 40% say Donald Trump did better

    https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/13/yougoveconomist-poll-september-10-13-2016/
    Thank you!
    Polling vs PB Trumper anecdote.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    MaxPB said:


    Not really, the party of EUphillia will not appeal to Tory voters who voted remain.

    It's certainly been enlightening watching the Conservatives on here jibing and sneering at the Lib Dems at every opportunity and what more appropriate time than during the Party's Conference.

    Tim's speech today is of personal and political significance. As an LD who voted LEAVE on June 23rd, I'm concerned at some of the hand-wringing from Farron and one or two others. We voted to leave the EU - narrowly but decisively - and that instruction from the electorate has to be acted upon.

    The question then becomes whether the outcome of the Article 50 negotiation - "a new deal for Britain" (you heard it here before May, Hammond, Davis, Fallon et al repeat it ad nauseam in 2019) should itself be subject to a referendum.

    The problem with that thesis is there is no contingency for another "No" vote. If the May negotiation is rejected, what then ? Could we go back and have another go ? Plainly not.

    There is of course a mechanism for passing judgement on the negotiation outcome and it's called a General Election. Parties putting themselves forward have to explain what they would do if elected and that would include a new round of negotiations with the EU to "soften" or "harden" the final deal as appropriate or even seeking to re-join the EU.

    It would be perfectly reasonable for a new Government to seek to re-negotiate the details of our divorce from the EU but it would need the EU to want that to happen. Hypothetically, if the Article 50 negotiations left us out of the Single Market in 2019 and in 2020 the current Government fell and was replaced by a party or parties wanting us to go back into the Single Market, could we negotiate renewed access to that on a basis akin to Norway ?

    I want to hear Tim say today he respects the vote, he wants the Article 50 negotiations to be successful and transparent but the "red lines" include continued membership of the Single Market and if the result of the A50 negotiations is we have to depart the Single Market because we no longer accept Freedom of Movement, how he would persuade the British people that membership of the Single Market is more important and beneficial than curtailing Freedom of Movement.

    Oddly enough, I think Theresa May has a similar task but both leaders face a strong anti-immigration (as distinct from anti-immigrant) mood and that, rather like perceptions on crime, isn't going to be assuaged by statistics or gimmicks.

  • tysontyson Posts: 6,049
    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
  • On topic, I've gone balls deep on a Trump victory.

    If he loses, I won't be disappointed.

    If he wins, I'll use the money to build a fallout shelter and buy drinks whilst the world burns.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    Trump is an obnoxious, racist bully. His fails the beer test even more than Hillary does.
  • I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.

    Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.

    As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
    Does it matter what gets Tweeted? Twitter is no more the USA than it is Britain.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    What's Trump's path to 270?
  • PlatoSaid said:

    MaxPB said:



    Because in recognising the problem she will be protecting her WWC flank from Trump. Hillary isn't ever going to win the votes of people looking for 0 migration, they are all voting for Trump whatever happens. However, in pledging to increase the number from 110k to 200k she is moving against the tide of people generally wanting less migration, especially third world migration. If she moves to change that pledge, I've seen that there is a problem and we need to do more to screen out terrorists, we're going to reduce the number to 55k and limit migration to women and children only. That grabs her a share of voters who are currently in Trump's camp but may not be looking for a reduction to zero migrants.

    Even holding it at 110k would be a start. Increasing the numbers is a completely catastrophic policy pledge, especially in light of the current terrorist attacks being carried out by a foreign national who was naturalised.

    Clinton just doesn't get it. A Washington DC Juncker?

    My gut tells me Trump wins this because she is making all the mistakes of the Remain campaign, and worse, and I can't recall am democratic candidate I've disliked more. If I feel like that, on this side of the Atlantic, the how the hell is she going down in the US?

    It's a sign.

    Say what you like about Cameron (and I have) at least he recognised he was losing in the final weeks, and realised the problem - even if he felt trapped by the campaign and that he could do nothing about it.
    Cameron's Number 10 address two days before the vote was a dead giveaway.

    That Obama is pleading with blacks to vote for Hillary - because they voted for him and he's black makes no sense. And if you don't vote for Hillary, you're sexist...

    It's the most bizarre messaging. I honestly can't see where they're going. I read dozens of tweets/articles from both sides and Team Hillary are doing a terrible job of this. It's very Remain - full of name calling and snobby destain.
    Hillary, like Remain, is selling no positive message; it's all 'Trump is awful'. Even if that's true (and it is - check out his latest comments about the arrest and medical care of the suspected bomber, which come close to legitimising police executions: no 'protect and preserve the constitution' here), Trump has a motivated base; she doesn't. She still needs to get her vote out, which they may or may not do if they think poorly enough of her.

    FWIW, I think Hillary winning a weak mandate while the country ensuring that her power is limited from the off by electing a GOP majority again in both Houses is still the most likely outcome. But a Trump win is still a very real possibility.
  • @Plato - it's a core vote strategy.

    It's very telling to see what campaigns are actually doing, rather than what they say.

    The first time I knew that Remain were in real trouble (rather than just hoping for Leave) was when the pattern of campaigning became clear in the final weeks - Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and deriding 'Little Englanders'.
  • tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    Yes, I think that works for white men.

    Clinton is gambling on the US demographics that favour her, which might or might not work.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited September 2016
    Jobabob said:

    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    What's Trump's path to 270?
    Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
  • "Amanuensis" is a big word to be using in a spat before breakfast. Some of us haven't even had our coco pops yet.....

    SO obviously showing supercilious disdain for ordinary PBers who were already having trouble with 'supercilious'..
  • On topic, I've gone balls deep on a Trump victory.

    If he loses, I won't be disappointed.

    If he wins, I'll use the money to build a fallout shelter and buy drinks whilst the world burns.

    "It's not about the money. It's about sending a message: everything burns!"
  • MaxPB said:

    Jobabob said:

    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    What's Trump's path to 270?
    Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
    needs N Carolina as well?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    MaxPB said:

    Jobabob said:

    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    What's Trump's path to 270?
    Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
    I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.

    There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    On topic, I've gone balls deep on a Trump victory.

    If he loses, I won't be disappointed.

    If he wins, I'll use the money to build a fallout shelter and buy drinks whilst the world burns.

    Make Betting Great Again!
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    @Plato - it's a core vote strategy.

    It's very telling to see what campaigns are actually doing, rather than what they say.

    The first time I knew that Remain were in real trouble (rather than just hoping for Leave) was when the pattern of campaigning became clear in the final weeks - Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and deriding 'Little Englanders'.

    Team Hillary occupying 97% of advertising slots and Trump getting $100m in donations under $200 speaks volumes.

    I think he's going to do it - incredible as that is.

    I'd no idea he was so interested in politics until this campaign - I thought he was a total media celeb, his Alky Ada comments re 911 were a real surprise.
  • A New Yorker article on what President Trump's first term would look like:

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/09/26/president-trumps-first-term
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Interesting

    David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.

    Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.

    The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7bc8765e-7ea8-11e6-9862-c87336845bcf

    Better story in today's Times was Tony Robinson campaigning in Bristol.

    Knocked on a good which opened wafted on cannabis smoke.

    Bredraggled long haired student states blearily out "Hey! How did you jump out of my TV, Baldrick!"


  • Mr. Meeks, which part of my post about a referendum on a negotiated deal being tosh do you disagree with?
  • DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jobabob said:

    tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    What's Trump's path to 270?
    Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
    I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.

    There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
    The debates will do for Hillary, the more people she of her the more they dislike her. She's politics' Yoko Ono.
  • tyson said:

    @Casino

    I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff.....
    It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...

    Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.

    Yes, I think that works for white men.

    Clinton is gambling on the US demographics that favour her, which might or might not work.
    But she's so sincere.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIsb4OYYbZ8
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    SkyNews
    AP: Paris Prosecutors' office says there have been eight new arrests in connection with the Bastille Day attack in Nice in France
This discussion has been closed.