Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s Trump news – the payoff just before WH2016 and the D

2»

Comments

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 4,521

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    slade said:

    I went to see The Darkest Hour tonight. Very absorbing film with some great performances. But does it sacrifice the truth for a good narrative? For example did Churchill ride the District Line and talk to a very PC group of Londoners?

    that scene should have been taken out and shot.
    Surely the reverse happened? It was shot and put it. AIUI it’s a device to illustrate Churchill’s internal conflict, rather than purporting to be an actual record of events. You were watching a drama, not a documentary.
    I know it was a narrative device. Unfortunately, it's also a hackneyed narrative device, as illustrated by the clip I posted.

    There's another, more subtle point. By reducing Churchill's resolution of his internal conflict to a chance event, it reduces his importance. To see what I mean here, imagine if he had not taken that Tube: would he have reached a different conclusion? Given what we know about Churchill, that seems implausible.
    It’s also a metaphor for “ordinary people getting it right while elites get it wrong”. I can understand why it’s got some upset.
    That's not why I dislike the scene.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 26,204
    Buzzfeed loses one of the last remaining reasons for reading it:

  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,239
    Off topic - I’ve been reading up on the Italian election.
    Their electoral system is very complicated!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 30,933
    rkrkrk said:

    Off topic - I’ve been reading up on the Italian election.
    Their electoral system is very complicated!

    Does it involve AV? :D
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,239
    RobD said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Off topic - I’ve been reading up on the Italian election.
    Their electoral system is very complicated!

    Does it involve AV? :D
    From what I can tell - that seems to be the only voting system that doesn’t get a look in.
    One thing I read is that parties must list their candidates in alternating gender for the chamber of deputies and that voters can write in up to two candidates as long as they are of different genders.

    It seems a system for which polling will be a very poor predictor of what will happen.
    I wondered if there was an expert on here who could give a few tips.

    I did think about laying Berlusconi to be next PM since he is technically not valid and would need to appeal a court decision - but who knows!?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 25,664
    edited January 13

    Buzzfeed loses one of the last remaining reasons for reading it:

    Buzzfeed are losing money faster than a trump casino...they clearly need to take a leaf out of the guardians book and spend months deciding to change the colour of the text in the masthead.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 30,933

    Buzzfeed loses one of the last remaining reasons for reading it:

    Buzzfeed are losing money faster than a trump casino...they clearly need to take a leaf out of the guardians book and spend months deciding to change the colour of the text in the masthead.
    They really splashed out this time. They used a spell checker :D
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,614
    We don't have numbers for 2017 yet, and won't for about five weeks. (And even that will be a preliminary number, and will likely be subject to adjustments.)

    I would be very surprised if we did hit 1.7% in 2017, as weakness in consumer spending is unlikely to have been fully compensated for in manufacturing and contruction. DavidL and I had an over/under at 1.5% for the year, and my guess is that is exactly where it's going to come out.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,614
    Also, that's rather selective choosing of GDP growth numbers. If you look at the IMF, for example, they have had a 2017 UK growth number of 0.3% (immediately following EU Ref), that rose to 1.8% at the end of 2016, before coming off to 1.1% immediately following 1Q17 GDP numbers, and which was 1.5% in October.

    The only sensible way to do it would be to choose the GDP growth forecasts for 2017, as of (say) 1/1/17. Instead we have a hodgepodge of forecasts from different dates.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,614
    rcs1000 said:

    We don't have numbers for 2017 yet, and won't for about five weeks. (And even that will be a preliminary number, and will likely be subject to adjustments.)

    I would be very surprised if we did hit 1.7% in 2017, as weakness in consumer spending is unlikely to have been fully compensated for in manufacturing and contruction. DavidL and I had an over/under at 1.5% for the year, and my guess is that is exactly where it's going to come out.
    Final point: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth

    The first three quarters of this year were 0.3%, 0.3%, and 0.4%. I think a continued accelaration to 0.5% (which takes us to 1.5% for the year) is realistic. Assuming we'll be at 0.7% in Q4 seems optimistic given the disastrous data from VISA on UK consumer spending in Q4.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,239
    edited January 13
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We don't have numbers for 2017 yet, and won't for about five weeks. (And even that will be a preliminary number, and will likely be subject to adjustments.)

    I would be very surprised if we did hit 1.7% in 2017, as weakness in consumer spending is unlikely to have been fully compensated for in manufacturing and contruction. DavidL and I had an over/under at 1.5% for the year, and my guess is that is exactly where it's going to come out.
    Final point: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth

    The first three quarters of this year were 0.3%, 0.3%, and 0.4%. I think a continued accelaration to 0.5% (which takes us to 1.5% for the year) is realistic. Assuming we'll be at 0.7% in Q4 seems optimistic given the disastrous data from VISA on UK consumer spending in Q4.
    NIESR estimated 0.7 for the final quarter I think.

    EDIT - actually 0.6%.

    Any interest in a bet for 2018?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,490

    Buzzfeed loses one of the last remaining reasons for reading it:

    Buzzfeed are losing money faster than a trump casino...they clearly need to take a leaf out of the guardians book and spend months deciding to change the colour of the text in the masthead.
    Very good! They spent millions paying six-figure salaries to lure journalists from the traditional press, but they’ve broken almost no stories and no-one reads their site apart from clickbaity lists of stuff and viral videos surrounded with obnoxious ads. Not a great business model.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,490
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We don't have numbers for 2017 yet, and won't for about five weeks. (And even that will be a preliminary number, and will likely be subject to adjustments.)

    I would be very surprised if we did hit 1.7% in 2017, as weakness in consumer spending is unlikely to have been fully compensated for in manufacturing and contruction. DavidL and I had an over/under at 1.5% for the year, and my guess is that is exactly where it's going to come out.
    Final point: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth

    The first three quarters of this year were 0.3%, 0.3%, and 0.4%. I think a continued accelaration to 0.5% (which takes us to 1.5% for the year) is realistic. Assuming we'll be at 0.7% in Q4 seems optimistic given the disastrous data from VISA on UK consumer spending in Q4.
    Consumer spending down and GDP being held up by increased exports. What’s not to like.
This discussion has been closed.