Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A former odds-on favourite for the Democratic nomination sa

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A former odds-on favourite for the Democratic nomination says the LDs could form the next UK government

Back in late 2003, not too long after the Iraq War, the governor of Vermont, Howard Dean, was causing a stir on the WH2004 betting markets. He had become just about the first politician to tap into the power of the internet and was running a very effective online campaign building up hundreds of thousands of supporters.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,941
    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    619 said:

    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
    Will be ignored.
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    It might have done, in the absence of *that* antisemitism report.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    I just want to know if Trump will take the bait and continue to attack the former beauty queen for being too fat. She is doing a lot of interviews at the moment saying what a terrible person he is.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 49,035
    Jobabob said:

    619 said:

    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
    Will be ignored.
    How much have you lumped on Clinton :) ?
  • Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    On topic, I think it helps the Lib dems with a USP and unified front on the European question ( which no other party has yet), and may help them win seats in the bigger city's who voted REMAIN. If its a rerun of 2010, I wouldn't be massively surprised ( though I also think it unlikely to pan out like that exactly)
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    I can't judge this anymore

    Harry Cole
    Errr: "All holocaust denial is acceptable." https://t.co/0sgFf0RSV0
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Not least because she'd be in the Lords. There's never been a Shadow HS in the Lords before since the system of regular shadows became established in the 1950s, and there hasn't been an actual HS in the Lords since 1841.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    An, er, interesting prediction. Never say never, everything is conceivably possible, but let's just say there's good reason to be skeptical.

    Isn't dean the one who got partly derailed through the bad luck of broadcast of him yelling at a speech making him look crazy, though given he was before a noisy packed crowd to those there it was appropriate?
  • Time for the Howard Dean scream.

  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/us/politics/donald-trump-debate.html?_r=0

    This is hilarious.

    'There were early efforts to run a more standard form of general election debate-prep camp, led by Roger Ailes, the ousted Fox News chief, at Mr. Trump’s golf course in Bedminster, N.J. But Mr. Trump found it hard to focus during those meetings, according to multiple people briefed on the process who requested anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. That left Mr. Ailes, who at the time was deeply distracted by his removal from Fox and the news media reports surrounding it, discussing his own problems as well as recounting political war stories, according to two people present for the sessions.'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Not least because she'd be in the Lords. There's never been a Shadow HS in the Lords before since the system of regular shadows became established in the 1950s, and there hasn't been an actual HS in the Lords since 1841.
    An excellent move from a man who wants reform then - if there's no rule against it, and if people object say sure, but we need to sort out the rest of the issues with the lords as well.
  • Actually I'm writing a thread for this weekend on a similar theme to this.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,557
    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,557
    Pulpstar said:

    Jobabob said:

    619 said:

    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
    Will be ignored.
    How much have you lumped on Clinton :) ?
    I have laid off a touch but still Long Clinton Short Trump @ a bit better than evens.
  • Thanks Mike. I needed a good laugh today.
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Could a non-MP do that role? (I guess Mandy was trade sec)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 22,057
    On topic, I suppose going from 0.00000000000000000001% to 0.00000000000000000002% is an "increasing chance"....

    Quiet news day, eh? Not like we could have had a thread, on, oh I don't know, the Conference speech of the Leader of the Opposition?
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,831
    Sounds like Dean needs to go back to practicing medicine.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Actually I'm writing a thread for this weekend on a similar theme to this.

    Wot, another thread saying lib dem maj nailed on? You are spoiling us, Ambassador.
  • Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    Wouldn't white make her look even more washed out?
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Could a non-MP do that role? (I guess Mandy was trade sec)
    Not very effectively. Is she supposed to text Amber Rudd her questions, or shout them down the corridor? She could be the Labour spokesman on Home Affairs but it's difficult to shadow someone you can't see.
  • Ishmael_X said:

    Actually I'm writing a thread for this weekend on a similar theme to this.

    Wot, another thread saying lib dem maj nailed on? You are spoiling us, Ambassador.
    Not quite. It is a history lesson for PBers.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,831

    On topic, I suppose going from 0.00000000000000000001% to 0.00000000000000000002% is an "increasing chance"....

    Quiet news day, eh? Not like we could have had a thread, on, oh I don't know, the Conference speech of the Leader of the Opposition?

    Or the court decision on the NHS contract.
  • Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    So many impossible things have happened (Corbyn, Trump, Syriza, Tory majority, Brexit) that you can't rule anything out, but it does sound unlikely.
    If Brexit becomes unpopular, which it will if companies start closing UK operations, and the LibDems or a new LD/SDP Alliance gets to 40% at the appropriate time, then FPTP will deliver.
    Now, that would beat 50:1!
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    4 scientic polls on the debate

    Morning Consult: Clinton + 23
    You Guv: Clinton + 27
    CNN: Clinton + 25
    PPP: Clinton + 11

    Trump didn't win. Only question now is how it effects polling
  • All things are possible, but ther's an increasing possibility Howard Dean is talking bolloxs.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,210
    We can all dream.....
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Off topic the migrant impact fund Corbyn is due to tout today is not a new idea: it was set up by Gordon Brown and scrapped by the coalition. Funded by £50 levy on visas.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/aug/06/fund-impact-immigration-scrapped
  • @chrisshipitv: Labour official: 'I can't give you a paper copy of the speech'. I ask: 'is that because there've been some late changes?' *eyebrows rise*
  • glwglw Posts: 4,647
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Well if you wanted to lose the "law & order" vote that would be one way of going about it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,385
    This being the same Howard Dean who suggested Trump was on coke during the debate ?

    I'm not sure his political judgment is razor sharp these days...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,557

    Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    Wouldn't white make her look even more washed out?
    She wore Red, White and Blue for the different days of the Dem conference. I think she's going to do the same for the debates.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Ishmael_X said:

    Off topic the migrant impact fund Corbyn is due to tout today is not a new idea: it was set up by Gordon Brown and scrapped by the coalition. Funded by £50 levy on visas.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/aug/06/fund-impact-immigration-scrapped

    Yes, and the entire amount of money that it gave out to Lambeth council was £60,000. The whole thing was busted on Daily Politics today.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 387
    If, or as I'm increasingly thinking, when, the Lib Dems form the next government under FPTP, I imagine they'll drop PR in the first week, or do people think it will take as long as the first couple of months?
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,210
    Fishing said:

    If, or as I'm increasingly thinking, when, the Lib Dems form the next government under FPTP, I imagine they'll drop PR in the first week, or do people think it will take as long as the first couple of months?

    Easy answer to that - the Lib Dems applauded Justin Trudeau in Canada, who won under FPTP and promptly implemented PR. One of the reasons he's becoming a folk hero in the party. A Lib Dem MP voting against PR would have the same career prospects as a Tory MP voting to join the EU army and give the Falklands away.
  • Nigelb said:

    This being the same Howard Dean who suggested Trump was on coke during the debate ?

    I'm not sure his political judgment is razor sharp these days...

    Political judgement aside, was he right about the coke? There are a bunch of people on the site who work in finance, do you guys think it fits?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,839
    We're going Cambridge! And not only are we going to Cambridge, we're going to Eastbourne, and Lewes, and Twickenham, and East Dumbartonshire, and Torby. We're going to Bath, and Burnley, and Yeovil, and Cheltenham.

    YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
  • tpfkar said:

    Fishing said:

    If, or as I'm increasingly thinking, when, the Lib Dems form the next government under FPTP, I imagine they'll drop PR in the first week, or do people think it will take as long as the first couple of months?

    Easy answer to that - the Lib Dems applauded Justin Trudeau in Canada, who won under FPTP and promptly implemented PR. One of the reasons he's becoming a folk hero in the party. A Lib Dem MP voting against PR would have the same career prospects as a Tory MP voting to join the EU army and give the Falklands away.
    Has he actually implemented PR yet?
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited September 2016
    Crowds up to one deep at Corby conference speech

    https://mobile.twitter.com/MattChorley/status/781121551718645761/photo/1
  • tpfkar said:

    Fishing said:

    If, or as I'm increasingly thinking, when, the Lib Dems form the next government under FPTP, I imagine they'll drop PR in the first week, or do people think it will take as long as the first couple of months?

    Easy answer to that - the Lib Dems applauded Justin Trudeau in Canada, who won under FPTP and promptly implemented PR. One of the reasons he's becoming a folk hero in the party. A Lib Dem MP voting against PR would have the same career prospects as a Tory MP voting to join the EU army and give the Falklands away.
    Under PR, the Lib Dem who voted against its introduction would only have no future within the Lib Dems. PR opens up all sorts of opportunities (or widens them) for politicians to keep their careers open when their relationship with their party breaks down.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    DP banging on about the Tories again. I know that labour are dire but really!
  • Well it's a view. Not one I share.
  • Not a cult....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,100
    They bloody love him.

    Dear Leader indeed.
  • "Is Howard Dean a gambling man?," I ask innocently.
  • @Richard_Nabavi He has acknowledged past recreational use of marijuana. This may be as clearcut an example of reefer madness as we shall ever see.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,839

    Well it's a view. Not one I share.

    Maybe disgruntled pro-EU Tories and big chunk of Labour MPs could defect to the Lib Dems. It'd be like a school where a group of boys are playing football and then a load of other boys come in a take over the game. I can imagine Farron desperately trying to hang on to power - "I'm still in charge, I was elected", but nobody listens to him as George Osborne and someone from Labour begin their campaigns to become leader.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,100
    lame joke
  • Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    So many impossible things have happened (Corbyn, Trump, Syriza, Tory majority, Brexit) that you can't rule anything out, but it does sound unlikely.
    If Brexit becomes unpopular, which it will if companies start closing UK operations, and the LibDems or a new LD/SDP Alliance gets to 40% at the appropriate time, then FPTP will deliver.
    Now, that would beat 50:1!
    As I said earlier, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a LD govt simply because of Labour's current problems. If the Lib Dems can capture the sensible left and ally it to a discontented centre-right then they have an election winning coalition. FWIW, I don't think Farron would be capable of either, and wouldn't even want to try to appeal to the centre-right.

    As things stand now, Lab+LD is routinely less than Con. In other words, the Lib Dems (or Labour) can only win by gaining votes back from Con and UKIP (and perhaps SNP), or from former non-voters, but that really is wishful thinking.

    But where Dean is utterly wrong is that the Lib Dems might win off the back of a 'No Brexit' campaign. Firstly, it won't be practically possible to stop it; once A50's invoked, that's it, the clock is ticking. And secondly, even if it were possible, the British public simply don't feel strongly enough about it in sufficient numbers for it to act as a vote switching prompt.
  • tpfkar said:

    Fishing said:

    If, or as I'm increasingly thinking, when, the Lib Dems form the next government under FPTP, I imagine they'll drop PR in the first week, or do people think it will take as long as the first couple of months?

    Easy answer to that - the Lib Dems applauded Justin Trudeau in Canada, who won under FPTP and promptly implemented PR. One of the reasons he's becoming a folk hero in the party. A Lib Dem MP voting against PR would have the same career prospects as a Tory MP voting to join the EU army and give the Falklands away.
    Thanks, I'd forgotten about Trudeau - another recent 'impossible' feat taking the Canadian Liberals from third place and from 34 seats to 184.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/results-2015/
    https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=trudeau election liberals
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,758

    Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.
    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    Well, it certainly helps that the Labour Party has fragmented and it is hard to see how it can come back again into one piece.

    It also helps, in that the Conservatives have lost their USP as the party of business and commerce. How they ever thought they could turn their back on the European market and stability; and yet maintain their reputation for being business-friendly beats me. All their leaders seem to have gone bonkers.

    So if both Labour and the Tories are going down the drain, it is the Lib Dems who will have to step up to the plate. Mr Dean may be foreign, but he is not necessarily wrong.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Nigelb said:

    This being the same Howard Dean who suggested Trump was on coke during the debate ?

    I'm not sure his political judgment is razor sharp these days...

    Political judgement aside, was he right about the coke? There are a bunch of people on the site who work in finance, do you guys think it fits?
    In a way it would be even more worrying if the Trumpster was so incoherent, vain and egotistical without the excuse of being coked to the eyeballs!
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,999
    Off topic
    Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.
    It seems that the thorough report Dutch investigators managed to produce was partly with the assistance of the Finns who have Russian BUK missile launchers and which enabled them to be used to test hypotheses against the evidence found in Eastern Ukrainian fields. However the Finnish parliament was unaware of this until yesterday’s report in Dutch newspapers. The secrecy is creating a bit of a hoohah in Helsinki.

    Compelling videos from the joint investigation team:



    also: http://www.ruutu.fi/video/2232494
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    Shrewsbury? Can anyone shed any light on that?
  • It should be noted, however, that were the Lib Dems to have most seats after the next election, I do stand to win just shy of £1,400. This was not particularly aimed for.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    Pulpstar said:

    Jobabob said:

    619 said:

    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
    Will be ignored.
    How much have you lumped on Clinton :) ?
    Absolutely nothing. As I have said time and again on here I never bet on short odds favourites. That said, I haven't backed Trump either. I might play the state markets nearer the time.
  • Not very olive branchy is it?
  • Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    So many impossible things have happened (Corbyn, Trump, Syriza, Tory majority, Brexit) that you can't rule anything out, but it does sound unlikely.
    If Brexit becomes unpopular, which it will if companies start closing UK operations, and the LibDems or a new LD/SDP Alliance gets to 40% at the appropriate time, then FPTP will deliver.
    Now, that would beat 50:1!
    As I said earlier, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a LD govt simply because of Labour's current problems. If the Lib Dems can capture the sensible left and ally it to a discontented centre-right then they have an election winning coalition. FWIW, I don't think Farron would be capable of either, and wouldn't even want to try to appeal to the centre-right.

    As things stand now, Lab+LD is routinely less than Con. In other words, the Lib Dems (or Labour) can only win by gaining votes back from Con and UKIP (and perhaps SNP), or from former non-voters, but that really is wishful thinking.

    But where Dean is utterly wrong is that the Lib Dems might win off the back of a 'No Brexit' campaign. Firstly, it won't be practically possible to stop it; once A50's invoked, that's it, the clock is ticking. And secondly, even if it were possible, the British public simply don't feel strongly enough about it in sufficient numbers for it to act as a vote switching prompt.
    I did say 'if Brexit becomes unpopular'. Time and 'events' will tell.
    Politics is the 'art of the possible'. If it's necessary to ditch Brexit or more likely fudge it, then it will be done (A50 or no A50).
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    Nigelb said:

    This being the same Howard Dean who suggested Trump was on coke during the debate ?

    I'm not sure his political judgment is razor sharp these days...

    Political judgement aside, was he right about the coke? There are a bunch of people on the site who work in finance, do you guys think it fits?
    In a way it would be even more worrying if the Trumpster was so incoherent, vain and egotistical without the excuse of being coked to the eyeballs!
    LOL! Fair point!!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 31,853
    edited September 2016
    Wide angle shot of outside the conference hall listening to the Messiah speech.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1430040.main_image.jpg
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    619 said:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/us/politics/donald-trump-debate.html?_r=0

    This is hilarious.

    'There were early efforts to run a more standard form of general election debate-prep camp, led by Roger Ailes, the ousted Fox News chief, at Mr. Trump’s golf course in Bedminster, N.J. But Mr. Trump found it hard to focus during those meetings, according to multiple people briefed on the process who requested anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. That left Mr. Ailes, who at the time was deeply distracted by his removal from Fox and the news media reports surrounding it, discussing his own problems as well as recounting political war stories, according to two people present for the sessions.'

    Shades of Sarah Palin.

    Trump is truly the heir to Palin.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    edited September 2016
    Wow, stoney faced Sadiq
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 31,853
    edited September 2016
    Did Justin124 write this bit on Labour's election "success"?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 12,657
    Prime Minister Tim Farron - Has a nice ring to it!
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 831
    Ok, so where is this olive branch?
  • glw said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Shami Chakrabarti as Shadow Home Secretary would put the cat among the pigeons. #lab2016

    Well if you wanted to lose the "law & order" vote that would be one way of going about it.
    Put Shami into Justice and in charge of the jails and cut the prison population down by mass releases. Of course the public would react, just slightly.
  • Free Markets lead to the wars we are seeing...hmmm....I am not sure Syria Civil War came about because of the Free Market.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    Did Justin124 write this bit on Labour's election "success"?

    Justin124 gets more mentions on here than actual appearances.

    He is referenced daily, yet I have never seen him post!!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,941
    @MrHarryCole: Strap in boys and girls - we are going to be here for ages. Corbyn speech is v, v long.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    'New era politics'. Is that the Marxist doctrine from 100 years ago?
  • fair play sadiq
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024

    Time for the Howard Dean scream.

    seriously that was the scream that ended for him? How petty.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,958

    Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    Wouldn't white make her look even more washed out?
    And fat. She is broad beamed below the waist. White does not flatter her. Frankly, trousers don't flatter her. Her outfits are barely one up from the sort of elasticated coloured trousers that you see pensioner ladies wandering round garden centres wearing.

    She ought to be wearing dresses. A well made dress would do wonders for her appearance. And three-quarter length coats. And she can certainly afford to pay for good quality clothes. But on this she is either blind herself or being advised by blind people with no taste.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Jobabob said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jobabob said:

    619 said:

    Jobabob said:

    fpt Post-debate poll: Hillary 4% up on before the debate (-1 to +3)
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/

    Yes that will be greeted by a wall of silence from the Platoite Trump-ramper tendency on here.

    They prefer out of date voodoo polling from neutral sources such as Breibart.
    It also says that the majority of people thought Clinton won the debate
    Will be ignored.
    How much have you lumped on Clinton :) ?
    Absolutely nothing. As I have said time and again on here I never bet on short odds favourites. That said, I haven't backed Trump either. I might play the state markets nearer the time.
    I think the state markets are where the value will be, possibly the EV totals too, though these are quite difficult bands to forecast because so State dependent.
  • JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    PClipp said:

    Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.
    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    Well, it certainly helps that the Labour Party has fragmented and it is hard to see how it can come back again into one piece.

    It also helps, in that the Conservatives have lost their USP as the party of business and commerce. How they ever thought they could turn their back on the European market and stability; and yet maintain their reputation for being business-friendly beats me. All their leaders seem to have gone bonkers.

    So if both Labour and the Tories are going down the drain, it is the Lib Dems who will have to step up to the plate. Mr Dean may be foreign, but he is not necessarily wrong.
    If the Liberals had a decent, eye-catching leader, like Chuka etc, they could easily overtake Labour and quite feasibly hold the balance of power in 2020.

    Getting rid of (the very nice) Farron is key – he's invisible. They should be making serious overtures to the sensible europhile wings of the Tory and Labour Parties, and kick on from there.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145

    Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off (pre-Falklands, contrary to myth) - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    So many impossible things have happened (Corbyn, Trump, Syriza, Tory majority, Brexit) that you can't rule anything out, but it does sound unlikely.
    If Brexit becomes unpopular, which it will if companies start closing UK operations, and the LibDems or a new LD/SDP Alliance gets to 40% at the appropriate time, then FPTP will deliver.
    Now, that would beat 50:1!
    As I said earlier, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a LD govt simply because of Labour's current problems. If the Lib Dems can capture the sensible left and ally it to a discontented centre-right then they have an election winning coalition. FWIW, I don't think Farron would be capable of either, and wouldn't even want to try to appeal to the centre-right.

    As things stand now, Lab+LD is routinely less than Con. In other words, the Lib Dems (or Labour) can only win by gaining votes back from Con and UKIP (and perhaps SNP), or from former non-voters, but that really is wishful thinking.

    But where Dean is utterly wrong is that the Lib Dems might win off the back of a 'No Brexit' campaign. Firstly, it won't be practically possible to stop it; once A50's invoked, that's it, the clock is ticking. And secondly, even if it were possible, the British public simply don't feel strongly enough about it in sufficient numbers for it to act as a vote switching prompt.
    That latter sentence breaks down in the scenario envisaged, of a seriously deteriorating economy due to the Brexit process.
  • Good afternoon, everyone.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    He doesn't do anger very well does he
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cyclefree said:

    Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    Wouldn't white make her look even more washed out?
    And fat. She is broad beamed below the waist. White does not flatter her. Frankly, trousers don't flatter her. Her outfits are barely one up from the sort of elasticated coloured trousers that you see pensioner ladies wandering round garden centres wearing.

    She ought to be wearing dresses. A well made dress would do wonders for her appearance. And three-quarter length coats. And she can certainly afford to pay for good quality clothes. But on this she is either blind herself or being advised by blind people with no taste.

    She should go for a decent skirt suit.

    Of course obesity and bad dress sense are not nessecarily damaging with swing voters in Ohio or Florida...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,100
    Is that really right about housebuilding? Pretty sure it's not.

    Where are Avery's yellow boxes? Can't be a***ed to look myself for that spreadsheet.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,682
    Afternoon all :)

    Well, it would be nice (though I would say that, wouldn't I ?) As I recall from the heady days of the 1980s if the LDs got to about 36% the disparity between votes cast and seats won would start to unwind dramatically.

    If the Party got 45% and the Conservatives and Labour 25%, the LDs would win almost every seat. The resulting majority Government would introduce STV for all elections in its first Queen's Speech.

    More seriously, there is a huge amount of water to go under countless bridges before we reach the 2020 GE and if I were a supporter of either UKIP or the LDs, I would fancy my party's chances of tearing some chunks out of the May Bloc by then. It seems implausible the Brexit proposals will please all of the people all of the time and that, along with the day to day screw ups of Government, should start bringing the Conservative vote share back down into the 30s.

    Labour will remain entrenched in their heartlands but unable to make much headway beyond so those disillusioned with or dissatisfied by Curly, Mo and Larry leading the negotiations, will be looking elsewhere for the alternatives. "Hard Brexit" may get some on here all unnecessary but others view the prospect with more concern.

  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    Whaheyyyyy back to the 70's
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    she should stick to red.
  • Spectacularly and laughably wrong, and a good indication of how commenting on other countries' politics is fraught with pitfalls.

    It is just conceivable that the Lib Dems might form the next government - the scenario runs something like 1981-2, where the Alliance was regularly polling 40%+ before they dropped off - but if so, it'll be despite their stance on Brexit, not because of it.

    So many impossible things have happened (Corbyn, Trump, Syriza, Tory majority, Brexit) that you can't rule anything out, but it does sound unlikely.
    If Brexit becomes unpopular, which it will if companies start closing UK operations, and the LibDems or a new LD/SDP Alliance gets to 40% at the appropriate time, then FPTP will deliver.
    Now, that would beat 50:1!
    As I said earlier, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a LD govt simply because of Labour's current problems. If the Lib Dems can capture the sensible left and ally it to a discontented centre-right then they have an election winning coalition. FWIW, I don't think Farron would be capable of either, and wouldn't even want to try to appeal to the centre-right.

    As things stand now, Lab+LD is routinely less than Con. In other words, the Lib Dems (or Labour) can only win by gaining votes back from Con and UKIP (and perhaps SNP), or from former non-voters, but that really is wishful thinking.

    But where Dean is utterly wrong is that the Lib Dems might win off the back of a 'No Brexit' campaign. Firstly, it won't be practically possible to stop it; once A50's invoked, that's it, the clock is ticking. And secondly, even if it were possible, the British public simply don't feel strongly enough about it in sufficient numbers for it to act as a vote switching prompt.
    I did say 'if Brexit becomes unpopular'. Time and 'events' will tell.
    Politics is the 'art of the possible'. If it's necessary to ditch Brexit or more likely fudge it, then it will be done (A50 or no A50).
    The timeline doesn't work though.

    The next GE is likely to be in 2020. In all probability, Brexit will be complete by then, so a 'No Brexit' policy makes no sense. A 'let's reapply for EU membership' would be possible and if Brexit is unpopular by then, might make sense, though I still harbour exterme reservations that it'd be an election-winning policy.

    Even if the election's earlier and Brexit is not complete, A50 will have been invoked. No matter what a new British government might want, the UK would then only be staying in the EU if all other 27 countries want it, and given the problems the UK's caused over the past four decades, I simply don't see how that happens.

    Politics is indeed the art of the possible, but 'No Brexit' isn't possible once A50's been invoked.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,839
    Scott_P said:

    @MrHarryCole: Strap in boys and girls - we are going to be here for ages. Corbyn speech is v, v long.

    Is this a North Korean style test of devotion? Will those falling asleep be shot?
  • My tv seems to have developed a fault....it is now showing some programme from the 1970s.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    The Edstone :grin:
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 831
    Repealing the trade union act would be insane, back to the 70's indeed.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 22,057
    Scott_P said:

    @MrHarryCole: Strap in boys and girls - we are going to be here for ages. Corbyn speech is v, v long.

    What, the full Fidel long? Eek.....
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,958

    Cyclefree said:

    Alistair said:

    PB Quiz

    Will Clinton wear Blue or White at the next Debate? I'm going with White.

    Wouldn't white make her look even more washed out?
    And fat. She is broad beamed below the waist. White does not flatter her. Frankly, trousers don't flatter her. Her outfits are barely one up from the sort of elasticated coloured trousers that you see pensioner ladies wandering round garden centres wearing.

    She ought to be wearing dresses. A well made dress would do wonders for her appearance. And three-quarter length coats. And she can certainly afford to pay for good quality clothes. But on this she is either blind herself or being advised by blind people with no taste.

    She should go for a decent skirt suit.

    Of course obesity and bad dress sense are not nessecarily damaging with swing voters in Ohio or Florida...
    Too easy to go wrong with skirt suits. A dress and coat is much simpler, more comfortable to wear and is elegant. Authoritative too.

    Trousers rarely look good on women of her age and build in a formal context.

    (I am available to advise the women in our Cabinet as well. Though not La May who has found a style for herself which, generally, works.)

This discussion has been closed.