Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nine days to go to the by-election and a report from on the gr

SystemSystem Posts: 11,004
edited October 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nine days to go to the by-election and a report from on the ground in Witney

Witney is a safe Tory seat was made ultra safe by the relatively equal division between Reds and Yellows plus the bonus of having the PM as MP. Last time out Labour thumped Lib Dems in the undercard. In the referendum Remain won 54-46.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212
    edited October 2016
    First like Farron 2020
  • Options
    Many thanks Mr Wheatley
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212
    edited October 2016
    During a PM's honeymoon and given the national poll ratings the Tories cannot lose their second safest seat. So second place is really the initial skirmish in what could prove a long battle to become the more credible opposition party.
  • Options
    That 1/8 on the Tory share of the vote being lower than in 2015 is free money.

    There's usually a personal vote increase for party leaders, which should theoretically unwind this time.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    New thread curse.....

    In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.

    Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.

    It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    FPT: F1: just gossip but reinforces the rumour that has Hulkenberg going to Renault on a two year contract:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37605311

    The question would seem to be whether that's to drive with Magnussen or if another chap will also join the team.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Mr. Moses, reminds me of the line already being run that if Corbyn does badly in 2020 that it'll be blamed on the PFJ.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212
    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Moses_ said:

    New thread curse.....

    In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.

    Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.

    It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.

    Pasty Tax was an excellent example of this nonsense - bringing warm cooked pastries in line with fish and chips IIRC. But it all got lost in the froth.

    Trump didn't say he'd jail Hillary without trial blah blah - but his supporters heard Hillary For Prison. That's the talent he has for soundbites.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    That was the time that they were so captured by extreme Christians that they nominated a Mormon?
  • Options
    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    FPT for Mortimer

    For my part, rule by technocracy tends towards the anti-humane because based on two flaws:

    1. That the needs of the many outweigh the needs of few (ie a reductive utilitarianism)

    2. That the needs of the many are even knowable.

    Ultimately we cannot be reduced to numbers or equations.

    Ideology is vital as a reflection of morality, whether held individually or communally. Whether one prefers equality over liberty simply has to be ideological, and necessarily has to inform a great deal of political decisionmaking.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited October 2016

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Start???


    Edit to add: I see him as a campaigner not a leader.
  • Options

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    You are wrong about UTAH.

    http://fortune.com/2016/10/09/utah-republicans-against-trump/
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited October 2016

    FPT: F1: just gossip but reinforces the rumour that has Hulkenberg going to Renault on a two year contract:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37605311

    The question would seem to be whether that's to drive with Magnussen or if another chap will also join the team.

    Careful Mr Morris, dodgy ground there.........you cant post potential untruths or scuttlebutt as it's not interesting or allowed by the PB Pixel Plod.

    :wink:
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    On topic, a really useful report and pretty convincing evidence and info that this shouldn't be anything but a convincing Con hold.

    One factor, on top of the local ones listed, as to why the Lib Dem playbook isn't apparently gaining much traction is that their attempts to play the tactical game only work if there's a good motivation to engage in it. Starting from well behind, with Corbynite Labour enthused and - most importantly - with the May still in something of a honeymoon period, that doesn't really apply. Sure, the Tories aren't overwhelmingly popular - the big poll leads are probably more a relative thing than an absolute one - but only to a degree. If the Cons were genuinely unpopular then even if Labour was seen as worse, there'd be much more leakage to the LDs and UKIP taking place independently of campaigning than there has been.

    That said, the LD share should indeed be well up and it'll be interesting to see whether Farron can piggy-back of a decent result to get more coverage (and if he can, whether he can make much of it). I remain far from convinced by his strategic thinking in terms of positioning the Lib Dems to maximise the opportunities presented by Labour's troubles.
  • Options
    dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Mr. Moses, me? Post scuttlebutt? You'll be accusing me of posting flimflam next.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,315
    Moses_ said:

    New thread curse.....

    In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.

    Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.

    It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.

    Quite right.

    And in that spirit, here's an archetypal Trump evangelist:
    https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/10/10/trump-ally-alex-jones-i-was-told-people-around-clinton-shes-demon-possessed/213712
    I've been told this by high up folks. They say listen, Obama and Hillary both smell like sulfur. I never said this because the media will go crazy with it, but I've talked to people that are in protective details, they're scared of her. And they say listen, she's a frickin' demon and she stinks and so does Obama. I go, like what? Sulfur. They smell like Hell....
    (This guy has a syndicated radio audience in the millions.)
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited October 2016

    Mr. Moses, me? Post scuttlebutt? You'll be accusing me of posting flimflam next.

    Indeed ..... Chortles*


    * checked and appears not to be on the PB ban list.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
    Not necessarily true. Once the electorate figure out who the challenger is in a by election, the third party gets squeezed. There are next to no consequences nationally.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,702

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
    UKIP also beat the LibDems last time. If they are supposed to appeal to Labour voters why can't they capitalise on the fairly high Labour vote.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,918

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Given the effort they've put in, I think the LibDems need to be north of 15% to show progress in Witney.

    A share north of 20%, and well clear of Labour, would be a good result for them.
  • Options
    philiph said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Start???


    Edit to add: I see him as a campaigner not a leader.
    What is the difference between leading a campaign and being a leader?
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    One thing in the LDs' favour not mentioned here is that (according to Guido) the Tory candidate is a Leaver. He'll still win of course, but with the 46L/54R result there must be plenty of Tory Remainers who'd consider lending a vote to the LDs.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,918

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    I doubt they'll lose their deposit.

    That being said, if the LibDems with their dodgy barcharts illustrative graphics can persuade a sizeable chunk of the Labour vote that they are the way to "beat the Tories", then maybe.

    My best guess is:

    Con - 48%
    LDs - 21%
    Lab - 11%
    UKIP - 10%
    Green - 6%

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Nice piece by Douglas Murray on the hate-crime statistics industry:
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/try-turn-whole-life-one-big-hate-crime/
  • Options
    GasmanGasman Posts: 132
    Good article, but I'm confused. What exactly was a Lib Dem "target seat" in 2015?
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    LDs still invisible at the national level and no evidence that they are attracting disaffected centrist Labour types; instead they seem to going to the Tories or Green.

    Difficult to know what Farron can do.
    One weak spot - in an era when our economic model is under great scrutiny - is to have his shadow Chancellor in the Lords (Baroness Kramer). Someone even more invisible than Farron.

    What's Vince Cable doing these days?
  • Options
    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Essexit said:

    One thing in the LDs' favour not mentioned here is that (according to Guido) the Tory candidate is a Leaver. He'll still win of course, but with the 46L/54R result there must be plenty of Tory Remainers who'd consider lending a vote to the LDs.

    I'm not familiar with the area but that's not the impression that i get generally of Tory Remainers. The vast majority were unenthusiastic about the EU but saw remaining as the better of two bad options, and and now reconciled to the done deal that Brexit is. How someone voted or campaigned in the spring is largely a dead issue unless they're obsessive on the point.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    philiph said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Start???


    Edit to add: I see him as a campaigner not a leader.
    What is the difference between leading a campaign and being a leader?
    What's the difference between tactics and strategy?
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Jonathan said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
    Not necessarily true. Once the electorate figure out who the challenger is in a by election, the third party gets squeezed. There are next to no consequences nationally.
    That's true but if the principal party of opposition is overtaken by the party starting fourth, it's still a poor result. There's no good reason for Labour not to be the challenger: they start well-placed and have the historic results to back up that it wasn't simply a blip in 2015. It ought to be Labour squeezing the LD vote.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Mr. Herdson, tactics are for battles. Strategies are for wars.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Essexit said:

    One thing in the LDs' favour not mentioned here is that (according to Guido) the Tory candidate is a Leaver. He'll still win of course, but with the 46L/54R result there must be plenty of Tory Remainers who'd consider lending a vote to the LDs.

    I'm not familiar with the area but that's not the impression that i get generally of Tory Remainers. The vast majority were unenthusiastic about the EU but saw remaining as the better of two bad options, and and now reconciled to the done deal that Brexit is. How someone voted or campaigned in the spring is largely a dead issue unless they're obsessive on the point.
    Can't think who you mean...
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,140

    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?

    Where is Elvis's bus pass when you need one?
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    On topic, I picked up a few days ago on a report of a Lib Dem from Liverpool travelling down to Witney to canvass. It does look like the LDs are back to caring much more about by elections than all the other parties put together.
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    Essexit said:

    One thing in the LDs' favour not mentioned here is that (according to Guido) the Tory candidate is a Leaver. He'll still win of course, but with the 46L/54R result there must be plenty of Tory Remainers who'd consider lending a vote to the LDs.

    I'm not familiar with the area but that's not the impression that i get generally of Tory Remainers. The vast majority were unenthusiastic about the EU but saw remaining as the better of two bad options, and and now reconciled to the done deal that Brexit is. How someone voted or campaigned in the spring is largely a dead issue unless they're obsessive on the point.
    Fair - I'd revise 'plenty' to 'a few'. Tories who really do care about the EU exist, I've met a handful. But yes, most are pragmatic about it now.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?

    Where is Elvis's bus pass when you need one?
    Standing in Witney instead.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?

    Doubt we'll see any markets on this. Someone has been taking an enterprising (if illegal) approach to campaigning:

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/someone-is-distributing-fake-leaflets-to-try-and-disrupt-the

    image
  • Options
    George Osborne now appearing on the Select Committee for Industrial Strategy - shown on Parliament TV.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    Mr. Herdson, tactics are for battles. Strategies are for wars.

    Quite. You and I get that; my point is that I'm not sure that Farron does.
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    He Can't win without expanding his base, and saying all DK are Shy trumpers is ridiculous. They are more likely to just not vote, and if they are going to vote, they would probably split evenly between the candidates.

    Media fussing barely dented him? Aside from early indications of a sharp drop in polls and open warfare in the Republican caucuss, you're right, barely a scratch
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Nigelb said:

    Moses_ said:

    New thread curse.....

    In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.

    Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.

    It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.

    Quite right.

    And in that spirit, here's an archetypal Trump evangelist:
    https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/10/10/trump-ally-alex-jones-i-was-told-people-around-clinton-shes-demon-possessed/213712
    I've been told this by high up folks. They say listen, Obama and Hillary both smell like sulfur. I never said this because the media will go crazy with it, but I've talked to people that are in protective details, they're scared of her. And they say listen, she's a frickin' demon and she stinks and so does Obama. I go, like what? Sulfur. They smell like Hell....
    (This guy has a syndicated radio audience in the millions.)
    I've read chunks of a Secret Service guy who served the Clinton's during Bill's reign - she sounded vile in private. The Wikileaks are full of HillaryBot empathy scripts she parrots. I honestly can't get her at all - so coldfish.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/28/ex-secret_service_agent_people_need_to_know_the_real_hillary_clinton_and_how_dangerous_she_is.html
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    Makes you wonder afresh how on Earth the Republicans ended up with Trump. And not just Trump, but Carson, Cruz, Rubio - all in their way mad, bad, and/or dangerous to know.
  • Options

    Nice piece by Douglas Murray on the hate-crime statistics industry:
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/try-turn-whole-life-one-big-hate-crime/

    Sorry but I couldn't read that headline without thinking of the classic Judge Dredd nemesis, Judge Death.

    His byline: "The Crime is Life. The Sentence is Death".
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    BBC news breaking

    "Russia's President Vladimir Putin has postponed a planned visit to France amid a row over Syria, French presidential sources say."
  • Options

    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?

    It appears that the racist, xenophobe oppressed, too-long-ignored wwc vote will be split.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Mr. Tyndall, ha. When not being distracted by videogames, I do sometimes get distracted by reading Wiki entries about history and fiction. I remember reading about Judge Death.

    He'd make a better Home Secretary than Rudd.

    Mr. Herdson, on the other hand, if the Lib Dems are less an empire and more a roving band of barbarians, the line between tactics and strategies becomes rather faded.

    Anyway, I must be off to do some work.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,918
    edited October 2016
    Moses_ said:

    BBC news breaking

    "Russia's President Vladimir Putin has postponed a planned visit to France amid a row over Syria, French presidential sources say."

    Amusingly, the first (and so far only) bank to announce it's moving it's European headquarters out of London in a Russian government owned one, VTB.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    Mr. Tyndall, ha. When not being distracted by videogames, I do sometimes get distracted by reading Wiki entries about history and fiction. I remember reading about Judge Death.

    He'd make a better Home Secretary than Rudd.

    Mr. Herdson, on the other hand, if the Lib Dems are less an empire and more a roving band of barbarians, the line between tactics and strategies becomes rather faded.

    Anyway, I must be off to do some work.

    Tactics without a coherent strategy (or perhaps more accurately, a strategy that was ossified in the 1990s) is how the Lib Dems came to be shagged in 2010-15. The barbarians were invited to join the ruling classes and both those they joined and those they left came to despise them.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,810

    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.

    Alastair, completely off topic, do you have any good advice of where to look for information on flexible draw down pensions and benefits versus negatives of switching from existing funds/final salary/etc. Obviously it would eventually mean Financial adviser if really looking at it but want to do some initial searching.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,799
    Cyclefree said:

    I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.

    But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.

    Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like an uncivilized uncouth boor. It is no excuse to say that people used to behave like that 30 years ago or may do so still in private. Boasting about sexual assault, about humiliating another person is gross behavior and it was 30 years ago as well. Men were perfectly well able to know the difference between right and wrong, between what it is to behave in a gentlemanly manner and what it is to behave like a brute. They know this now and we do a great disservice to those men who do know how to behave and control themselves and treat others with courtesy and politeness and respect to assume that they are really like Trump and only behaving well out of political correctness or fear of being criticized.

    If we rightly criticize migrants from certain countries/cultures for their boorish/criminal/insulting/misogynistic behavior to women, then we should also do so when white middle class rich men with an overweening sense of indispensability or entitlement do the same. Or indeed when any man who is not a migrant behaves in such a way. Sexual assault is an abhorrent crime, no matter who does it.

    Trump's behavior shows his unfitness for public office. IMO.

    Just because he claims to speak for those who feel excluded does not excuse him from expectations of civilized behaviour. The problems of the "left behind" classes are not served (well or at all) by people who condescend to them, who use them for their own purposes and who show, by the way they talk about and treat those who are more vulnerable than they are, that they have no regard for the weak, the abandoned, the isolated, but simply see them as people to be used to advance their own ambitions.

    That's all.

    Yes.

    And I am reasonably confident that plenty of Ohio barflies see this as the sort of behaviour that would render Trump as the bar asshole in their preferred haunts.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    619 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    He Can't win without expanding his base, and saying all DK are Shy trumpers is ridiculous. They are more likely to just not vote, and if they are going to vote, they would probably split evenly between the candidates.

    Media fussing barely dented him? Aside from early indications of a sharp drop in polls and open warfare in the Republican caucuss, you're right, barely a scratch
    hmmm

    I dont like either candidate, but if Europe is an example " controversial" canndiates and parties get under-recordced both in the polls and increasingly in the exit forecasts.

    In German elections the media has consistently called the AfD vote about 3-4% below what they actually achieve. The problem with villainisation is eventually people start lying because they dont want to say what they think.

    I cant see the US being that different.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,318
    Very interesting article - thanks John. I can confirm that the number of requests I've seen to Labour members to go and help in the by-election is zero. I expect I've missed some as I'm not local, but still I think it's odd.

    On Batley and Spen, right-wing nationalists are really spoiled for choice - I see 5 candidates who I'd think are to the right of UKIP. Considering the circumstances leading to the by-election, you might have thought they'd be a bit more shy.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    It's not swing voters but unmotivated voters.

    If there wasn't a free SCOTUS seat to encourage people otherwise totally unenthused by Trump Hilary would be home and dry against Trump.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited October 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    Makes you wonder afresh how on Earth the Republicans ended up with Trump. And not just Trump, but Carson, Cruz, Rubio - all in their way mad, bad, and/or dangerous to know.
    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,702
    rcs1000 said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    I doubt they'll lose their deposit.

    That being said, if the LibDems with their dodgy barcharts illustrative graphics can persuade a sizeable chunk of the Labour vote that they are the way to "beat the Tories", then maybe.

    My best guess is:

    Con - 48%
    LDs - 21%
    Lab - 11%
    UKIP - 10%
    Green - 6%

    There should be a competition for this.
    I don't think that you're far out, but I don't see UKIP going up since they have been going down in local by-elections since the GE.
    I'd say UKIP 5% (lost deposit area), maybe add 2% on to both Con and LD.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    malcolmg said:

    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.

    Alastair, completely off topic, do you have any good advice of where to look for information on flexible draw down pensions and benefits versus negatives of switching from existing funds/final salary/etc. Obviously it would eventually mean Financial adviser if really looking at it but want to do some initial searching.
    You could start off here (if you haven't already):

    https://www.pensionwise.gov.uk/?gclid=CjwKEAjwm_K_BRDx5o-sxq6ouXASJAC7TsFLNZYnsHvgOJPPY3iTOk8sQuuz8iMd7xfWze92FNdLURoCGuzw_wcB
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212

    Very interesting article - thanks John. I can confirm that the number of requests I've seen to Labour members to go and help in the by-election is zero. I expect I've missed some as I'm not local, but still I think it's odd.

    On Batley and Spen, right-wing nationalists are really spoiled for choice - I see 5 candidates who I'd think are to the right of UKIP. Considering the circumstances leading to the by-election, you might have thought they'd be a bit more shy.

    Lol. As a LibDem I get invited at least once a day, with the emails working through the list of well known names.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited October 2016
    FTPT
    PlatoSaid said:


    I've been genuinely shocked by the crap demographics in these polls - and then used to drive the news cycle. 58% of the CNN poll sample were Dems before the debate WTF? The WSJ one was a sample of 477 IIRC with a 8pt bias to Dems.

    And all the stations are running with Trump polling meltdown "why hasn't he thrown in the towel - stick a fork in him"

    It's not an accident. There's far too much evidence of it used to make the news.

    http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

    A 8 point lean to Dems is entirely expected.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''I cant see the US being that different.''

    Yep. And then there's turnout. Back in July 56% of Americans wanted Hillary Clinton indicted. Only 35% actively didn;t

    IF the current polls are correct then it seems some people who wanted Hillary indicted now want her to be President....???!!???

    Seems a bit funny to me.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,702
    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    Makes you wonder afresh how on Earth the Republicans ended up with Trump. And not just Trump, but Carson, Cruz, Rubio - all in their way mad, bad, and/or dangerous to know.
    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.
    One could respect Reagan.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,315
    PlatoSaid said:

    Nigelb said:

    Moses_ said:

    New thread curse.....

    In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.

    Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.

    It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.

    Quite right.

    And in that spirit, here's an archetypal Trump evangelist:
    https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/10/10/trump-ally-alex-jones-i-was-told-people-around-clinton-shes-demon-possessed/213712
    I've been told this by high up folks. They say listen, Obama and Hillary both smell like sulfur. I never said this because the media will go crazy with it, but I've talked to people that are in protective details, they're scared of her. And they say listen, she's a frickin' demon and she stinks and so does Obama. I go, like what? Sulfur. They smell like Hell....
    (This guy has a syndicated radio audience in the millions.)
    I've read chunks of a Secret Service guy who served the Clinton's during Bill's reign - she sounded vile in private. The Wikileaks are full of HillaryBot empathy scripts she parrots. I honestly can't get her at all - so coldfish.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/28/ex-secret_service_agent_people_need_to_know_the_real_hillary_clinton_and_how_dangerous_she_is.html
    You do understand that the diatribe I posted was that of a lunatic ?
  • Options

    Very interesting article - thanks John. I can confirm that the number of requests I've seen to Labour members to go and help in the by-election is zero. I expect I've missed some as I'm not local, but still I think it's odd.

    On Batley and Spen, right-wing nationalists are really spoiled for choice - I see 5 candidates who I'd think are to the right of UKIP. Considering the circumstances leading to the by-election, you might have thought they'd be a bit more shy.

    Why? The DPP had to move the suspect to London for trial, after all. Presumably no Yorkshire jury could be trusted...

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Ronald Reagan said something that would be very appropriate for Donald Trump:

    https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/784942158193258496
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    rcs1000 said:

    Moses_ said:

    BBC news breaking

    "Russia's President Vladimir Putin has postponed a planned visit to France amid a row over Syria, French presidential sources say."

    Amusingly, the first (and so far only) bank to announce it's moving it's European headquarters out of London in a Russian government owned one, VTB.
    "Moos said: "We are looking at several factors to decide where we switch our European headquarters to, including regulation, fiscal policy and the talent pool. Frankfurt, Paris and Vienna are all being considered."

    Scratch Paris then.

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/vtb-brexit-london-hq-move-2016-10
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover hmpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat inndamentally change.
    Makes you wonder afresh how on Earth the Republicans ended up with Trump. And not just Trump, but Carson, Cruz, Rubio - all in their way mad, bad, and/or dangerous to know.
    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.
    One could respect Reagan.
    In the 1980 election campaign those on the Left didnt. The same nonsense being pumped out about Trump was being pumped out then. madman, warmonger, clueless B film actor

    I was in a state of unshock when at the end of 1981 Reagan hadnt nuked the Soviets. The same garbage continued throughout his presidency by which time he had brought the Cold War to an end.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    It seems Clinton can pull a crowd too. Secret Service estimate 18,000 at Ohio rally :

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300333-clintons-ohio-rally-sets-attendance-record
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    Ronald Reagan said something that would be very appropriate for Donald Trump:

    https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/784942158193258496

    Of course Bill Clinton disproved that.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212

    malcolmg said:

    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.

    Alastair, completely off topic, do you have any good advice of where to look for information on flexible draw down pensions and benefits versus negatives of switching from existing funds/final salary/etc. Obviously it would eventually mean Financial adviser if really looking at it but want to do some initial searching.
    You could start off here (if you haven't already):

    https://www.pensionwise.gov.uk/?gclid=CjwKEAjwm_K_BRDx5o-sxq6ouXASJAC7TsFLNZYnsHvgOJPPY3iTOk8sQuuz8iMd7xfWze92FNdLURoCGuzw_wcB
    Hargreaves have a free guide you can request here:

    www.hl.co.uk/pensions/drawdown

    If you are Ok with managing your investments and aren't going to get tempted into spending all the money on the first day, I think it is well worth investigating. It is my plan for the DC part of my pension, which I will be able to draw in about two years time. I wouldn't, however, think that trading a final salary arrangement for it is likely to be sensible?
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    PlatoSaid said:


    I've been genuinely shocked by the crap demographics in these polls - and then used to drive the news cycle. 58% of the CNN poll sample were Dems before the debate WTF? The WSJ one was a sample of 477 IIRC with a 8pt bias to Dems.

    And all the stations are running with Trump polling meltdown "why hasn't he thrown in the towel - stick a fork in him"

    It's not an accident. There's far too much evidence of it used to make the news.

    http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

    A 8 point lean to Dems is entirely expected.
    Yep that would be pretty much in line with the 2008/2012 electorate.

    Plato - careful questioning the demogaphic sample of the polls, you're angerously close to becoming PB's own Dick Morris and 'un-skewing the polls', we all remember how that worked out...

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/02/dick-morris-the-worst-pundit-of-2012-156255
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,702

    malcolmg said:

    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.

    Alastair, completely off topic, do you have any good advice of where to look for information on flexible draw down pensions and benefits versus negatives of switching from existing funds/final salary/etc. Obviously it would eventually mean Financial adviser if really looking at it but want to do some initial searching.
    You could start off here (if you haven't already):

    https://www.pensionwise.gov.uk/?gclid=CjwKEAjwm_K_BRDx5o-sxq6ouXASJAC7TsFLNZYnsHvgOJPPY3iTOk8sQuuz8iMd7xfWze92FNdLURoCGuzw_wcB
    Moneysavingexpert have a good free booklet
    http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/annuity-guide

    Google 'Invested Annuity' too, can go up and down but better rate than standard annuity. I think only Aviva doing them now, LV and Pru have stopped.
    If you're lucky enough to have final salary, look carefully before moving out of it.
    DYOR.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    JackW said:

    It seems Clinton can pull a crowd too. Secret Service estimate 18,000 at Ohio rally :

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300333-clintons-ohio-rally-sets-attendance-record

    Shit that must be everyone in the Secret Service.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,212
    edited October 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    Makes you wonder afresh how on Earth the Republicans ended up with Trump. And not just Trump, but Carson, Cruz, Rubio - all in their way mad, bad, and/or dangerous to know.
    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.
    One could respect Reagan.
    At the time he stood and was elected there was a lot of scepticism (being polite) about his capability and intellect. Whether he made an impact or was a clueless (if talented presentationally) frontman, and whether he changed the world or was just in office at a lucky time, are both interesting debates.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''Of course Bill Clinton disproved that.''

    Kennedy made Clinton look like an amateur. The truth is, they all have feet of clay in one way or another. The establishment don;t want Trump because he won't play ball.

    The danger for Clinton is that voters see the rampant double standards.
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
    JackW said:

    It seems Clinton can pull a crowd too. Secret Service estimate 18,000 at Ohio rally :

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300333-clintons-ohio-rally-sets-attendance-record

    In a swing state just before early voting.

    Was she complaining about the Fire Marshalls as well?
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
    taffys said:

    ''I cant see the US being that different.''

    Yep. And then there's turnout. Back in July 56% of Americans wanted Hillary Clinton indicted. Only 35% actively didn;t

    IF the current polls are correct then it seems some people who wanted Hillary indicted now want her to be President....???!!???

    Seems a bit funny to me.

    Back in July answer's your question.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    JackW said:

    It seems Clinton can pull a crowd too. Secret Service estimate 18,000 at Ohio rally :

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300333-clintons-ohio-rally-sets-attendance-record

    But but what about Carrie Trumpshaw?
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Jonathan said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
    Not necessarily true. Once the electorate figure out who the challenger is in a by election, the third party gets squeezed. There are next to no consequences nationally.
    That's true but if the principal party of opposition is overtaken by the party starting fourth, it's still a poor result. There's no good reason for Labour not to be the challenger: they start well-placed and have the historic results to back up that it wasn't simply a blip in 2015. It ought to be Labour squeezing the LD vote.
    That would be very true if Labour were putting in the same effort as the LibDems - but ,of course, they are not!
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Pro_Rata said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.

    But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.

    Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like an uncivilized uncouth boor. It is no excuse to say that people used to behave like that 30 years ago or may do so still in private. Boasting about sexual assault, about humiliating another person is gross behavior and it was 30 years ago as well. Men were perfectly well able to know the difference between right and wrong, between what it is to behave in a gentlemanly manner and what it is to behave like a brute. They know this now and we do a great disservice to those men who do know how to behave and control themselves and treat others with courtesy and politeness and respect to assume that they are really like Trump and only behaving well out of political correctness or fear of being criticized.

    If we rightly criticize migrants from certain countries/cultures for their boorish/criminal/insulting/misogynistic behavior to women, then we should also do so when white middle class rich men with an overweening sense of indispensability or entitlement do the same. Or indeed when any man who is not a migrant behaves in such a way. Sexual assault is an abhorrent crime, no matter who does it.

    Trump's behavior shows his unfitness for public office. IMO.

    Just because he claims to speak for those who feel excluded does not excuse him from expectations of civilized behaviour. The problems of the "left behind" classes are not served (well or at all) by people who condescend to them, who use them for their own purposes and who show, by the way they talk about and treat those who are more vulnerable than they are, that they have no regard for the weak, the abandoned, the isolated, but simply see them as people to be used to advance their own ambitions.

    That's all.

    Yes.

    And I am reasonably confident that plenty of Ohio barflies see this as the sort of behaviour that would render Trump as the bar asshole in their preferred haunts.
    Dearest @Cyclefree

    I've said it on an earlier thread - but it doesn't bother me an iota. I worked at BT sales offices in the 90s where this was commonplace pub banter, and depending on the company at others.

    I think it's a massive fuss about nothing for those who either hear it and dismiss - or care about other stuff a lot more. It shrieks chatterati class outrage who don't get it as a cultural thing. Sex in the City was very ribald. A Twitter friend was a male stripper and most amusing on his hen night experiences.

    I simply think it's an attitude divide - women who aren't bothered give as good as they get - in kind. What currency 'in kind' comes in is another matter.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    Very interesting article - thanks John. I can confirm that the number of requests I've seen to Labour members to go and help in the by-election is zero. I expect I've missed some as I'm not local, but still I think it's odd.

    On Batley and Spen, right-wing nationalists are really spoiled for choice - I see 5 candidates who I'd think are to the right of UKIP. Considering the circumstances leading to the by-election, you might have thought they'd be a bit more shy.

    I'm not sure that final comment understands the mindset of the far right.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    Anyone know if there are any markets on Batley and Spen. According to wiki the following candidates are standing:

    English Independence Corbyn Anti
    Labour Tracy Brabin
    Liberty GB Jack Buckby
    National Front Richard Edmonds
    BNP David Furness
    English Democrats Therese Hirst
    Independent Waqas Ali Khan
    Independent Garry Kitchin
    One Love Party Ankit Love
    Independent Henry Mayhew

    Labour to romp home on a low turnout. English Democrats to come 2nd?

    It appears that the racist, xenophobe oppressed, too-long-ignored wwc vote will be split.
    Yes plenty of options there for the salt-of-the-earth born-in native English white working class, forgotten silent majority, love.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,799

    Very interesting article - thanks John. I can confirm that the number of requests I've seen to Labour members to go and help in the by-election is zero. I expect I've missed some as I'm not local, but still I think it's odd.

    On Batley and Spen, right-wing nationalists are really spoiled for choice - I see 5 candidates who I'd think are to the right of UKIP. Considering the circumstances leading to the by-election, you might have thought they'd be a bit more shy.

    I still get the Labour emailings, despite merely being a 2015 threequidder, but my most recent mails have been of the 'sign this for Corbyn' variety. No appeal yet to join the campaign in Batley & Spen, despite my being in the same council area, and I certainly did get mailings for Oldham West.

    Perhaps they are restricting this one to seasoned doorknockers, given that rival campaigns might contain some contingent of interesting characters.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,810

    malcolmg said:

    With the turnout likely to be down and the Conservative vote share likely to drop, there is going to be plenty for everyone else. Corbynites are motivated for their man so I don't expect the Labour vote share to drop much, if at all. I've bet on the 2/1 that Labour will get between 10-15% of the vote share and I'm as anxious about the top end as the bottom end.

    To date Labour have exceeded (admittedly low) expectations in every electoral test that they've faced to date. That pattern might well continue.

    Alastair, completely off topic, do you have any good advice of where to look for information on flexible draw down pensions and benefits versus negatives of switching from existing funds/final salary/etc. Obviously it would eventually mean Financial adviser if really looking at it but want to do some initial searching.
    You could start off here (if you haven't already):

    https://www.pensionwise.gov.uk/?gclid=CjwKEAjwm_K_BRDx5o-sxq6ouXASJAC7TsFLNZYnsHvgOJPPY3iTOk8sQuuz8iMd7xfWze92FNdLURoCGuzw_wcB
    Thank you, I had looked there initially but will do so in more detail.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    PlatoSaid said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.

    But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.

    Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like ns.

    That's all.

    Yes.

    And I am reasonably confident that plenty of Ohio barflies see this as the sort of behaviour that would render Trump as the bar asshole in their preferred haunts.
    Dearest @Cyclefree

    I've said it on an earlier thread - but it doesn't bother me an iota. I worked at BT sales offices in the 90s where this was commonplace pub banter, and depending on the company at others.

    I think it's a massive fuss about nothing for those who either hear it and dismiss - or care about other stuff a lot more. It shrieks chatterati class outrage who don't get it as a cultural thing. Sex in the City was very ribald. A Twitter friend was a male stripper and most amusing on his hen night experiences.

    I simply think it's an attitude divide - women who aren't bothered give as good as they get - in kind. What currency 'in kind' comes in is another matter.
    Snap !

    I worked in a BT sales and marketing office in the 80s and it was a pretty raucous place, the women giving as good as they got.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    619 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needed to recover his base first - he seems to have largely done it. The media fussing has barely dented him, and generated more DK who are still Shy Trumpers.

    SCOTUS is much wider than Roe vs Wade - it's death penalty and loads of other things we aren't even thinking of yet.

    The liberal left are in charge of:

    - education, via unions, faculties et al
    - the media
    - most multinationals in favour of globalisation

    Plus prospect of immigration from alien cultures ie Arabs/ME

    The view was that without SCOTUS - and a Democrat in office - the GOP was buggered. Social change would be too far gone, and the voting base would be swung massively towards Muslims. Immigration, liberal ideas et al would be embedded and America would fundamentally change.
    He Can't win without expanding his base, and saying all DK are Shy trumpers is ridiculous. They are Tween the candidates.

    Media fussing barely dented him? Aside from early indications of a sharp drop in polls and open warfare in the Republican caucuss, you're right, barely a scratch
    hmmm

    I dont like either candidate, but if Europe is an example " controversial" canndiates and parties get under-recordced both in the polls and increasingly in the exit forecasts.

    In German elections the media has consistently called the AfD vote about 3-4% below what they actually achieve. The problem with villainisation is eventually people start lying because they dont want to say what they think.

    I cant see the US being that different.
    The immense liberal left sanctimonious tutting in the media is so tiresome - it's an outrage and exaggeration contest. 91% of Trumpers didn't give a toss, an extra 2% of undecideds liked him for it.

    The disconnect between what the media thinks and what sections of the people think is enormous.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    PlatoSaid said:


    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.

    I thought this could have been true at the beginning of the campaign.

    But as time has worn on, his utter lack of fitness for high office, coupled with his misogyny and willingness to play the racist card means I do not think he can supported - even against Clinton.

    The grabbing pussy talk is objectionable not because of the word pussy but because it reveals a tolerance and even admiration of sexual violence.

    I've been in the odd rugby locker room myself and never heard anyone actually boast of this.

    Admit it, he's a bad 'un, and in good conscience he is unsupportable, no matter what you think of Clinton.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,318
    Pro_Rata said:



    Perhaps they are restricting this one to seasoned doorknockers, given that rival campaigns might contain some contingent of interesting characters.

    Sheesh! I've been knocking on doors in EVERY election since 1966. What do I have to do to become "seasoned"??? :)
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,150

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    Trump is a NYC liberal from Queens. He talks pugnaciously because that's his home town lingo - so it's hitting people, knocking them out et al. It's just colloquial. It upsets the PC brigade - and loved as common man by blue collars.

    He's swapped sides because IMO - he thinks America has lost it's way, it's become supine/losing its edge and pride 'Make America Great Again' isn't a slogan - it's a core belief.

    I'd stick him in the Reagan mindset politically - clearly he's not suave - but he's a cowboy.
    One could respect Reagan.
    In the 1980 election campaign those on the Left didnt. The same nonsense being pumped out about Trump was being pumped out then. madman, warmonger, clueless B film actor

    I was in a state of unshock when at the end of 1981 Reagan hadnt nuked the Soviets. The same garbage continued throughout his presidency by which time he had brought the Cold War to an end.
    Those who think Trump is like Reagan are being as idiotically ignorant as those you describe.

    Reagan had a long history of political activism and standing successfully for political office. He had political experience.

    Trump has none of these things. He is an ignoramus who thinks that shouting and bluster and offensiveness are a substitute for thought, experience and the hard work needed to achieve political office and make a success of it. He risks betraying the hopes and needs of those he claims to speak for, people who do not have wealth to fall back on, who cannot parlay their way into lucrative TV programmes.

    It is easy to sneer at liberal elites. Just because they are wrong about some things does not mean they are wrong about everything. Nor does it mean that those who publicly proclaim themselves to be against the liberal elites are right or worth listening to. That is just attitudinizing and pose-striking and such behaviour is no more worth paying attention to in a 60 year old than in a 16 year old. Indeed rather less since one normally supposes a 60 year old to have achieved some level of maturity.

  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    PlatoSaid said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.

    But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.

    Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like ns.

    That's all.

    Yes.

    And I am reasonably confident that plenty of Ohio barflies see this as the sort of behaviour that would render Trump as the bar asshole in their preferred haunts.
    Dearest @Cyclefree

    I've said it on an earlier thread - but it doesn't bother me an iota. I worked at BT sales offices in the 90s where this was commonplace pub banter, and depending on the company at others.

    I think it's a massive fuss about nothing for those who either hear it and dismiss - or care about other stuff a lot more. It shrieks chatterati class outrage who don't get it as a cultural thing. Sex in the City was very ribald. A Twitter friend was a male stripper and most amusing on his hen night experiences.

    I simply think it's an attitude divide - women who aren't bothered give as good as they get - in kind. What currency 'in kind' comes in is another matter.
    Snap !

    I worked in a BT sales and marketing office in the 80s and it was a pretty raucous place, the women giving as good as they got.
    I worked as a child labourer during the industrial revolution and you wouldn't believe the beatings I got there. Never did me any harm.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT I remember the post-analysis from POTUS 2012 when the consensus was that the republicans were doomed so long as they remained captured by their extreme Christians. That bit of their problem at least seems to have receded a little.

    Evangelical Christians have accepted Trump's contrition - we're humans and we sin/repent.

    Mormons are understandably more Umm, but the Utah GOP have said they'd back him.

    SCOTUS is the key here. It's enormously important and I fear that very many PBers simply don't get it as a swing point.
    Is there evidence that swing voters are motivated by the supreme court? You'd imagine they'd be unswingable if they thought it was an extremely important issue
    After the tape - Trump needt, barely a scratch
    hmmm

    I dont like either candidate, but if Europe is an example " controversial" canndiates and parties get under-recordced both in the polls and increasingly in the exit forecasts.

    In German elections the media has consistently called the AfD vote about 3-4% below what they actually achieve. The problem with villainisation is eventually people start lying because they dont want to say what they think.

    I cant see the US being that different.
    The immense liberal left sanctimonious tutting in the media is so tiresome - it's an outrage and exaggeration contest. 91% of Trumpers didn't give a toss, an extra 2% of undecideds liked him for it.

    The disconnect between what the media thinks and what sections of the people think is enormous.
    I'm still waiting for a Hilaryfan to give us a straight answer to should Bill be "First Husband" ? His past is as colourful as Trumps, so should he be allowed into the White House ?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Jobabob said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.

    But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.

    Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like ns.

    That's all.

    Yes.

    And I am reasonably confident that plenty of Ohio barflies see this as the sort of behaviour that would render Trump as the bar asshole in their preferred haunts.
    Dearest @Cycleer friend was a male stripper and most amusing on his hen night experiences.

    I simply think it's an attitude divide - women who aren't bothered give as good as they get - in kind. What currency 'in kind' comes in is another matter.
    Snap !

    I worked in a BT sales and marketing office in the 80s and it was a pretty raucous place, the women giving as good as they got.
    I worked as a child labourer during the industrial revolution and you wouldn't believe the beatings I got there. Never did me any harm.
    Well if youre so worried about old events Jaba are you for banning Bill from the White House ?

  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    justin124 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Excellent stuff - many thanks. If the LDs don't take second place here questions about Farron's leadership will start being asked, surely.

    Yes. The LDs are treating this as a marginal seat for them and throwing in resources to do well. Labour seem to be barely bothered. With the Jo Cox seat voting on same day, maybe Labour see it as not worth the effort? But there is a chance (slim) that the media may point out how the main opposition party is slipping down in an election, worse if Labour lose their deposit.
    Labour won 13% in 2010 in Witney. If they can't beat that then they really are in trouble. At their peak, in 1997, they won over 30% and have finished ahead of the Lib Dems in four of the six elections since (and including) 1992. It might be a weak seat for them but it's not one where they're badly placed vs the Lib Dems.
    Not necessarily true. Once the electorate figure out who the challenger is in a by election, the third party gets squeezed. There are next to no consequences nationally.
    That's true but if the principal party of opposition is overtaken by the party starting fourth, it's still a poor result. There's no good reason for Labour not to be the challenger: they start well-placed and have the historic results to back up that it wasn't simply a blip in 2015. It ought to be Labour squeezing the LD vote.
    That would be very true if Labour were putting in the same effort as the LibDems - but ,of course, they are not!
    And whose fault is that?
This discussion has been closed.