BludgerTrack: 54.2-45.8 to Labor

A further move against the Coalition on BludgerTrack leaves them looking hardly better than in the immediate aftermath of Malcolm Turnbull’s demise.

First up, please note the posts before this one on the Victorian election campaign and the resignation of Luke Foley.

The BludgerTrack poll aggregate has been updated with the only poll of the week, from Essential Research, which followed Newspoll in recording a movement in favour of Labor from 53-47 to 54-46. Labor is accordingly up by 0.6% in the aggregate’s two-party preferred reading, and have made gains of one apiece on the seat projection in Victoria and South Australia. Essential Research’s leadership ratings are also in the mix, but they haven’t made much difference. Full details through the link below.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,769 comments on “BludgerTrack: 54.2-45.8 to Labor”

Comments Page 4 of 36
1 … 3 4 5 … 36

  1. “I’ve had plenty of mates who have asked me if they could be my special envoy to sort the issue out… with Pamela Anderson”

    Very prime ministerial! Freaking goose.

  3. “BREAKING Sky News understand the Indonesian Govt is seeking a guarantee from Aust that it won’t move the Embassy in Israel – before it will finalise the FTA.”

    FFS. 🙁 ScoMo has fwarked up badly on this one. Got himself wedged between objective realities and a RWNJobbie brainfart.

    And Trump….fake video?? Faked up AFTER the original has been out in the wild for hours??

    These people really have zero respect for their supporters and are treating them as useful idiots who will believe anything no matter how disconnected from reality.

  6. The important part is the swinging voters needed to win elections were lost by Trump.

    Yeah. This time. But Re the Presidential race, in 2020 Trump will have a target.

  7. @Jimsciutto tweets

    Breaking: Democrat Kirsten Sinema takes slight lead over Republican Martha McSally in the close race for Senate in Arizona.

    @Sharri Markson tweets

    Michael Daley confirms Foley has this morning been referred to Candidate Review Committee. He says Foley should not pursue legal action. https://twitter.com/sharrimarkson/status/1060661331445989376

    Labor figures are pushing for Luke Foley to be disendorsed as the Labor candidate for Auburn. His candidacy has gone to Labor’s candidate review committee this morning. He may not survive. Plenty of anger about his press conference.

  8. State AGs demand anti-Mueller acting AG recuse himself from probe

    The Attorney General of New York State is demanding that acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker officially recuse himself for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

    “It’s vital that the Special Counsel’s investigation move forward free from any appearance of interference or bias. As such, Acting Attorney General Whitaker has a clear responsibility to recuse himself from any role in the investigation

    The letter was signed by the Attorneys General of Massachusetts, New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/state-ags-demand-anti-mueller-acting-ag-recuse-probe/

  10. Ph_Red
    That Times Sq crowd doesnt look ‘massive’. But I guess it was short notice and a taste of what might happen.

  11. Boerwar:

    [‘The other multiple mentions went to Hunt.’]

    Yes, him too. As well as others. It goes to show there are no friends in politics. It’s dog eat dog, as it has always been.

  12. Re Economy

    ABS released finance for owner occupied housing for the month of September. Points to continued slowdown in residential activity.

    Finance for construction of new dwellings was quite weak, -3.5% s.a. month on month, -17% from the January 18 peak, and the lowest monthly number since May 13.

    Finance for construction of newly built dwellings (e.g. newly developed apartments) was also quite weak, -3.9% s.a. month on month, -22% from the November 17 peak.

    Slide in finance for established dwellings was less marked at -0.5% month on month and -13% from the recent high in April 16.

    Comparable data for investors will be released next week.

  15. Leaked Audio Busts Trump’s New Attorney General Claiming Russia Didn’t Interfere In The Election

    Newly surfaced audio catches Trump’s interim Attorney General Matt Whitaker claiming that Russia didn’t interfere in the 2016 election.

    Whitaker said, “The left has tried to sew this theory that essentially Russians interfered with the U.S. election, which has been proven false. They did not have any impact in the election and that has been very clear from the Obama administration.”

    Every US intelligence agency has concluded that Russia interfered in the election. The Obama administration never said that Russia didn’t interfere in the election. On October 7, 2016, the Obama administration said that the Russians were carrying out hacks to influence the presidential election. Obama DNI James Clapper said in a statement, “We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”

    Legal experts have concluded that Trump’s installation of Whitaker is illegal, but it is now clear why Trump wanted to put him in charge of the DOJ. Whitaker’s mission is to kill the Mueller investigation.

    https://www.politicususa.com/2018/11/08/leaked-audio-busts-trumps-new-attorney-general-claiming-russia-didnt-interfere-in-the-election.html

  16. Simon² Katich® @ #144 Friday, November 9th, 2018 – 10:26 am

    G. I cant figure out how this will play out. How many Trump voters will stop voting for him if he closes down Mueller? How many Trump voters will change their vote if Mueller brings down serious adverse findings against the administration? Will it effect the GOP in their support for Trump or their nomination process for 2020? Will it just embolden and enrage Trumps base?

    Simon
    The Mueller thing has had its day.

    I think most voters are sick of it. in 18 months he SHOULD have come up with something more that a tax dodger, sleazy lawer, low level wannabe, 5 Russians in a basement and a Russian company that has told them put up or shut up ie We will see you in court.

    Sessions SHOULD have given Mueller a time limit ie not run interference but basically give him 12 months to come up with a report and refer all those to the courts and perhaps put the remainder of the investigation into mothballs until the referred cases are sorted, unless there is some really significant smoking gun that was uncovered in the first 12 months. At the very most he could have given Mueller a three months extension.

    I would say this WHATEVER the investigation. When we set up royal commissions they have strict ToR and TIME LIMITS.

    So I think that since impeachment is off the table because of the Senate outcome. Trump will be emboldened to close the Mueller Inquiry down.

    Now obviously I am a bit biased but I think I can be objective enough (I hope others can too) to see that open ended inquiries of this kind are just bad governing AND bad politics.

    If I were in the Whitehouse I would give Mueller until 30 November to put up or shut up. if the Democrats make a meal of the Mueller thing they will lose out. It is just not a big enough issue AND the whole Russia is the demon stuff is a bit ho hum in the USA.

    Additionally now that Trump is half way through his term, pushing him too hard sets they system up for Pence replacing him and then winning not one but two terms ie 10 years. The democrats if they have any brains will leave Trump in place and work hard to regain those critical states – the rust belt (PA, Michigan, WI,OH) and to do that they need policies to appeal to workers. Chasing Russian ghosts will NOT do that. a competent appealing democrat that is liked by the rust belt will have a good chance against trump, but less chance against a mild mannered silver fox like Pence.

  18. Now, there’s a thought. Does the Interim AG in the USA last until the Senate confirms a new one? So, could Mitch ‘Turtle’ McConnell just refuse to confirm a new one, like he did with Obama’s SCOTUS pick, thus keeping Whitaker in place indefinitely!?!

  19. Heard it before but …….. a Felony Friday would end the mid-terms week nicely

    Alt. U.S. Press Sec.‏ @AltUSPressSec

    UNCONFIRMED RUMORS out of Washington indicate @DonaldJTrumpJr may already be under indictment.

    Grant Stern‏Verified account @grantstern

    I’ve been hearing rumors all week that “arrests are imminent.”

    Let’s see if tomorrow is D-Day for the Trump family.

    Mueller’s grand jury meets on Fridays.

  20. G

    Unlike with Clinton it will be Trump with the history.

    Trump had plenty of history last time. His base didnt care then – they were too busy listening to the hate he regurgitated about Clinton. Dem candidate selection will be most interesting. Amy Amy Amy!

    A good indication of how things have improved for the Democrats. Texas is now a swing state like Florida

    A good example. Trump won the swing state of Florida. And looks like Republican has just won the senate spot.
    Orourke may have made Texas a marginal state. But it is not a swing state yet.

  21. Sen. Bernie Sanders has demonstrated the convoluted mess a person’s thought process can become entangled in when they try too hard to appear “reasonable and balanced” between black Democrat candidates on the one hand, and white voters who would vote Democrat but for the fact the Democrat candidate is black on the other:

    https://m.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/bernie-sanders-andrew-gillum-stacey-abrams_us_5be48626e4b0769d24cadd68

    If you want to know what would likely happen to minority voter turnout with Bernie Sanders as the Democratic nominee for President in 2020, you need go no further than this.

  24. Simon The Mueller thing has had its day.

    I thought it could have petered out. But Trump just made it flare up again. Either as a miscalculation or because he knows the report will be damning. Either way, i am leaning to it being a thing. A big thing.

    Sure, his core base will stick with him. But on the semi sensible fringes of his base, they will take notice of the corruptness of what he did and is doing in trying to hide it. It only has to turn a small portion of them to either change their vote or stay home.

  25. SK

    I am not saying its going to be a walk over for the Democrats. Its still margin of error stuff as to who will win the Presidency.

    However the news of the Midterms are that Trump has lost part of his base and has to work hard to win it back. He has two years to change that. The Democrats have two years to consolidate that.

  26. Ven:

    [‘At this stage Foley is going down in the eyes of his Labor colleagues.’]

    I’m fairly sure of two things:

    1. When Foley settles down, he’ll not proceed with a defamation suit; and

    2. If I’m right with 1, collateral damage to Labor will be insignificant, particularly given his colleagues (both the Feds and NSW) have publicly denounced his alleged highly inappropriate behaviour.

    I’m not sure how much it costs to sue another for defamation, but I think Foley would need to place around $200K in his solicitor’s trust account – then some.

  28. The midterm vote was good for Hillary. If there really were so many people voting against her in particular, you’d expect quite a swing to the Dems. I met a few people who said they’d only voted Trump because they couldn’t stand Hillary. I suspect they just used that as an excuse for voting Trump.

  29. phoenixRED:

    As I understand it, if Trump were to close down Mueller’s investigation, come January 1, the House Dems could start it up again, this leading to a probable constitutional crisis between the executive and the legislature, with the judiciary being called on to ascertain the limits of executive power, which may well find in Trump’s favour given the appointment of Kavanaugh.

  30. Also don’t forget how important that voting rights act on felons was for Florida.

    That means millions of more black voters are now eligible to vote in Florida. Thus the blue in Silver’s map I posted

    Speaking of Florida Harry Enten tweets

    @ForecasterEnten

    To be fair to Broward, many of the votes in my apartment’s cream soda vs. root beer election remain uncounted.

  31. Mavis Smith @ #179 Friday, November 9th, 2018 – 12:14 pm

    phoenixRED:

    As I understand it, if Trump were to close down Mueller’s investigation, come January 1, the House Dems could start if up again, this leading to a probable constitutional crisis between the executive and the legislature, with the judiciary being called on to ascertain the limits of executive power, which may well find in Trump’s favour given the appointment of Kavanaugh.

    And in the court of public opinion it would go down like a steaming hot pile of crap on a hot summer’s day left in your front yard by the local yahoo.

  33. Democratic Rep. Kyrsten Sinema took a narrow 9,610-vote lead over GOP Rep. Martha McSally Thursday evening as Arizona’s election authorities counted more ballots in the state’s uncalled Senate race.

    The lead amounts to less than half a percentage point with over 1.8 million votes counted. McSally was up by 17,703 votes earlier in the day, before the counties processed another 160,000 votes — but about a half-million more votes remain to be counted across Arizona, according to both campaigns.

    Most of the outstanding ballots are coming from Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa County, which is home to Phoenix and includes Sinema’s congressional district. Sinema held a slight edge of about 1 percentage point over McSally in the county as of Thursday afternoon, but the new votes counted Thursday expanded the Democrat’s Maricopa edge to 2.5 points. That’s the outcome Democrats had hoped for, while Republicans were expecting McSally’s tally there to improve.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/08/sinema-takes-slim-lead-in-too-close-to-call-arizona-senate-race-978733

  34. An object lesson for us in Australia about the long-term political impact of the legislative nobbling of unions:

    https://m.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/unions-helped-topple-scott-walker-and-bruce-rauner-but-only-after-the-damage-was-done_us_5be4708ce4b0e84388954d87

    The estimated 3.5% depression in the Democrat vote caused by such anti-labour action in the US won’t be so bad here with our compulsory voting, but even a third of that would have flipped Labor victories in 1987, 1990 and 2010.

  37. @SethAbramson teets

    NOTE: After today’s breaking news from Florida and Arizona, there’s a decent chance the Republicans end up gaining only *one* seat in the US Senate (52-48 from 51-49). That would eliminate even the *fantasy* the GOP has that this wasn’t a clear-cut #BlueWave. Bottom line: it was.

  38. Mavis Smith says: Friday, November 9, 2018 at 12:14 pm

    phoenixRED:

    As I understand it, if Trump were to close down Mueller’s investigation, come January 1, the House Dems could start it up again, this leading to a probable constitutional crisis between the executive and the legislature, with the judiciary being called on to ascertain the limits of executive power, which may well find in Trump’s favour given the appointment of Kavanaugh.

    *****************************************************************

    You are right Mavis – its sailing into unknown waters of a constitutional crisis ….even the best legal minds in the US argue over what may/may not happen legal wise to all the possibilities that might arise

    Like you say, the importance of Kavanaugh to Trumps survival looms large ……

    I think its very interesting times ahead – I remember the writers of “House Of Cards” saying this Trump thing is way beyond anything in their imagination of writing the scripts for the TV show

  41. Fair enough. I should have said more than a million

    You said….

    That means millions of more black voters are now eligible to vote in Florida

    “According to the Sentencing Project, there were 1,487,847 ex-felons in Florida who were unable to vote during the 2016 election, of which about a quarter, or 418,224, were black.”
    From the Vox article I linked.
    And a vast majority of them will not vote.
    But still good news in general and good news for the Dems in Florida.

  42. phoenixRED:

    [‘I remember the writers of “House Of Cards” saying this Trump thing is way beyond anything in their imagination of writing the scripts for the TV show.’]

    Yes, and as one ubiquitous Fairfax poster often puts it: ‘You couldn’t make this stuff up.’

  44. sprocket_ @ #183 Friday, November 9th, 2018 – 12:25 pm

    Democratic Rep. Kyrsten Sinema took a narrow 9,610-vote lead over GOP Rep. Martha McSally Thursday evening as Arizona’s election authorities counted more ballots in the state’s uncalled Senate race.

    The lead amounts to less than half a percentage point with over 1.8 million votes counted. McSally was up by 17,703 votes earlier in the day, before the counties processed another 160,000 votes — but about a half-million more votes remain to be counted across Arizona, according to both campaigns.

    Most of the outstanding ballots are coming from Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa County, which is home to Phoenix and includes Sinema’s congressional district. Sinema held a slight edge of about 1 percentage point over McSally in the county as of Thursday afternoon, but the new votes counted Thursday expanded the Democrat’s Maricopa edge to 2.5 points. That’s the outcome Democrats had hoped for, while Republicans were expecting McSally’s tally there to improve.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/08/sinema-takes-slim-lead-in-too-close-to-call-arizona-senate-race-978733

    That would be divine retribution by John McCain on Donald Trump. 🙂

  45. Rush v DT – some observations

    Caveat. My observations of the case come only from newspaper reports. These reports are likely to grossly distort and even outright misstate evidence given in the case. To the extent my observations rely on those reports they are obviously fragile.

    1. The case is of unprecedented interest as a study in advocacy. Court cases are “heard” by witnesses that are seen and whose stories are set out in evidence-in-chief and then tested in cross-examination. The role of a witness is to satisfy the trier of fact (in this case the judge) that the fundamentals (not every aspect) of their evidence makes sense. Ironically a witness is often more believable on the fundamentals of their story if there are readily conceded minor errors in bits and pieces of it. Having the witness reasonably concede the error suggests the witness is not “invested” in their story. This necessarily strengthens by contrast what remains.

    2. Here each party’s lead witness, and many of the supporting witnesses, are outstanding and experienced professional actors. It is their task, which they perfect, to make believable the characters they play. There are all sorts of techniques for doing so. Many of the techniques are not apt for a courtroom, but many are.

    3. Rush has had a simple role – to play himself. For this reason Rush has not had his hair cut and has not dressed smartly. It has been important to ensure he projects a man who has been devastated by the defamation. So, few smiles, no sense that he is enjoying any part of the process or even any amusing events within the process.

    4. Norvill’s role is much more complicated. She was a reluctant witness in the first place. Perhaps the only reason she voluntarily gave evidence was she was told that by not doing so voluntarily she would be called anyway. Then she would give evidence without being prepped with the result that she would have to deal with potential inconsistencies in her evidence exposed by cross-examination as best she could on her feet. She would likely have been told (truthfully) this would be the best way to make her look like a complete liar with all the resultant damage to her career a judge so finding would entail.

    5. Norvill’s role requires her to be “the victim” as well as “the accuser” as well as “the competent well-adjusted actor capable of taking unpleasant sexual harassment in her stride without making a big deal about it”. There are competing themes in each of these roles.

    6. IMO the fact Norvill made the formal complaint some months after the play closed with the intention of her complaint being entirely confidential makes it reasonable to suppose at least in her mind “something happened” between her and Rush with which she was very uncomfortable. When Norvill made the complaint to the STC she had had some months to wrap a story around the events that made her feel uncomfortable.

    7. When salient events occur in any of our lives making a story of it is something we all do, quite unconsciously. it is how we cognitively manage the experience. When we find the event unpleasant or difficult we do so to manage the experience psychologically as well. We light up some aspect of the event and shade other aspects. More often than we are capable of admitting, again unconsciously, we add a couple of brushstrokes here and there that add to the consistency of the interpretation of the event we have quite honestly (but necessarily inaccurately) constructed. We are routinely amazed but shouldn’t be, that others who witnessed the event and recount it weeks, months or years later have reconstructed accounts that are not consistent as to details with our own deeply held recollections. The deep divisions that arise between say spouses convinced of the accuracy of their own account and the downright dishonesty of the other’s account is the stuff of marriages. At best the conflict is managed by leaving the event as a no-go zone.

    8. I think it likely that people who are good actors are cognitively adept at wrapping stories around events (embellishing) and then being convinced of the veracity of the embellished event. Norvill’s embellished account now has her, in her own mind, the victim of persistent sexual harassment by Rush. Rush’s embellished account of his own actions has him in his own mind doing no more than having a relaxed, jokey, convivial and comfortable relationship with an actress whom he had to be very close with, emotionally and physically, in the respective roles they played in King Lear. In Lear Cordelia is his favourite daughter and her love is the only true love of Lear. It is because of her love for Lear and his silliness that they fall out.

    8. It is hardly surprising that Rush would want to step out of the pressure-cooker of that anguished role as appropriate from time to time and relate with Norvill as a fellow actor. Sexualised banter would cut right away from the acting role and would be an obvious way of releasing.

    9. To the extent Norvill’s evidence alleges Rush sexually harassed her on stage (deliberately inappropriately touched her), such actions by Rush if true would be damning. But Norvill’s evidence that Rush deliberately traced his finger across her breast is just the sort of embellishment that our minds unconsciously can give to a hand that perhaps gave rise to no more than a query at the time with the memory later summonsed and clothed as a detail consistent with the fundamental story that Rush had persistently sexually harassed her. Her evidence, quoted as follows:

    “The touch was different to what I’d experienced previously,” she said. “It was slow and light and pressured across my breast and that’s why I thought it was deliberate. It didn’t feel like an accident.”

    . . . has all the hallmarks of a “memory” that has been subjected to subsequent reconstruction. The reflection that the touch “was different to what I’d experienced previously” may have been instantaneous. But even so it has inevitably been the subject of further personal “testing” by Norvill such that any initial doubts about the differences in other physical contacts, if they were there, have long ago been erased:

    The trial judge reportedly said during DT submissions:

    Justice Wigney also stressed that while he had not “formed any view”, he was “grappling” with the idea that Mr Rush, an intensely committed actor, would do something so “extraordinary and potentially destructive” during an emotionally charged performance as to intentionally touch Ms Norvill “for his own sexual gratification”.

    10. In response to a PB query whether the whole cast needed to be called by one side or the other I replied that it was unnecessary for Rush to do so. I explained that unless the DT called witnesses to assert they had seen such-and-such a thing, the judge would be bound to assume such witnesses did not exist. This now appears in the submissions made by Rush reported as follows:

    She [counsel for Rush Chrysanthou] also referred to “a sea of absent witnesses” including a fellow co-star, Helen Thompson, and the Sydney Theatre Company stage manager Georgia Gilbert, to whom, according to Norvill’s testimony, Rush had also behaved inappropriately during the play.

    “Imagine Mr Rush behaved like this on a daily basis,” Chrysanthou said.

    “How is it possible if Ms Norvill is telling the truth that not one person saw it? [And] she goes even further. He wasn’t just doing it to me, he was doing it to all these other people.”

    11. I have earlier predicted it was likely Rush would succeed. That prediction remains and is largely based on the absence of a need for the trial judge to find that one or other of the protagonists is lying/telling the truth. IMO accepting everything Norvill has given in evidence does not justify the DT claim that Rush is “King Leer”.

    The allegation that Rush is “King Leer” to my mind does impute that Rush is a sexual pervert. A king leer is not just an occasional leer, as perhaps we all are as opportunity might innocently but for the moment pruriently cause us to be, but one who persistently and intentionally seeks to gain unwanted sexual gratification from propinquity. To this extent on what is a factual matter, IMO the submission by counsel for the DT, quoted below, is plainly wrong:

    “But Blackburn told the court on Thursday that terms such as “pervert” and “sexual predator” were not conveyed in the articles. ”

    12. Most importantly it seems the judge agrees. He responded to Blackburn’s submission thus:

    “Earlier on Thursday the judge said “bad puns” in the Telegraph’s headlines may have undermined Rush’s denials.

    “[That] argument would have significantly more force if not for the subeditors,” he said. “They just can’t help themselves with their bad puns. Bad puns is probably putting it in mild terms.”

    Wigney said there was “some considerable merit” in Blackburn’s argument that the article had emphasised Rush’s denials.

    But, he said, “the problem” were the headlines such as “King Leer” and “Star’s bard behaviour”, which he likened to “very large puffs of smoke suggesting there’s a fire there”.

    12. Each party has submitted the other is lying. It is of course necessary for the DT to make that submission in respect of Rush’s denials. It may be that some or other aspect of Norvill’s evidence requires Rush to concede that she could not be innocently mistaken, though I am unaware of it. As long as Rush’s case is not entirely based for success on the truth/false binary it possibly doesn’t matter. If Rush’s submissions concede a need to find Norvill was lying for Rush to succeed it makes his case much harder than I think it is. I doubt there is that lack of nuance.

    13.If Rush succeeds he will not “get a new swimming pool”, as Michael A pejoratively describes Rush’s purpose in litigating. Apparently (and perhaps understandably) it is news to the likes of Nicholas and Michael A that a person’s reputation might have a commercial value in addition to its obviously personal value.

    If the DT stole Rush’s car I assume, tentatively, that Nicholas and Michael A would think it reasonable that the DT be required to return the car or pay its money worth. Perhaps they might limit the recovery to the cost of a fair conditioned second hand vehicle. Who knows?

    The DT have stolen Rush’s reputation. One only needs to consider the monetary cost to an actor like Kevin Spacey to know what loss similar reputational damage can cause. It is obvious that Rush’s reputation cannot be returned by an apology. He is entitled (if successful) to recover the proven monetary value to him of his stolen reputation. Not some artificial limit Michael A would impose.

    As it happens the evidence seems to be that Rush has gone from an income of over $1M per year to an income of $40K per year. He is 67. His career was by no means over. It is an interesting actuarial calculation to work out how far into the future Rush’s loss of earnings might persist. Whatever the amount is, “swimming pools” is an inadequate metric. Suffice to say Rebel Wilson’s damages at first instance will be little by comparison.

    14. Whatever the outcome I really hope Norvill pursues a novel action for breach of privacy against the STC who at the least should not have confirmed to the DT that they had received a complaint about Rush. That information was confidential and its release enabled the DT relevantly to confirm the information they had otherwise received, leading to publication of the lot and significantly damaging Norvill.

  46. Re: Indonesian FTA. Jokowi can afford to sign a deal with Australia if there is even a hint of the Embassy moving. I think the whole thing is off until after the Indonesian election in May.
    There was a protest with over million people in Jakarta after moved the Americans embassy in Israel outside the US Embassy. It almost got out of control too.
    So Morrisson screwed up totally on this one. If only he had discussed it with DFAT or anyone an ounce of foreign policy knowledge before opening his stupid mouth.

  48. P1 @12:07
    “The Mueller thing has had its day.

    You really are a hoot, DTT. I think this is possibly your silliest post yet.”

    Gee,P1, There’s lots of competition for that honour!

  49. SK

    I still give Trump about a 50% chance of re-election, even if the Republicans lose the Senate in 2020. As for the ‘target’, I think that Pelosi will be elected Speaker, but step down during 2019 to avoid being a target.

    Trump is pretty cunning – he just has to keep Florida, Texas and most of those Rust Belt states in his column to win the Electoral College.

    I think no matter who the Democrat Presidential candidate is they will win the popular vote (but not necessarily the Presidency). Which would make since the Reagan-Bush triple term –

    Popular vote won by Democrats – 1992, 1996, 2000, 2008, 2012, 2016, ?2020
    Popular vote won by Republicans – 2004

  50. I did refer you to Nate Silvers map. His figures are crystal clear. I was being innacurrate with language not reality

    Ok
    a) I dont like to be pedantic (actually, I do. Dont tell anyone). But I had knowledge (from the vox article I had read) that you were out by a factor of 4 with your language. So I thought I would post about it.
    b) Silver is posting a direct midterm to 2020 electoral college comparison. It would be wise to be wary of this. Midterms are never nice to the incumbent. From your link, Silver also has another map adjusting for a more Neutral Environment. Electoral College is neck and neck on that one.
    https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1060517571030642693

Comments Page 4 of 36
1 … 3 4 5 … 36

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *