Holmes_and_Watson

That's tough on you, having pals that just don't understand football. Some folk just don't get it and obsessed about points and shots on target.

Lots of possession following another very early conceded goal. We did have an effort offside from a VAR review. Stung, we knuckled down and responded by ... not laying a glove on them. Plenty of possession, with nothing at the end of it. Some of our passing looks nice, but that's mostly just to get it clear from our own third, from where it breaks down. Along with the possession and the VAR, Martin will think that Archer got fouled for the second. Following that, Wolves had a spell where they pressed our defence. We folded under that pressure. So much for our ability to use the gaps to generate our own attacks. Wolves were much closer to a third than we were to getting a goal back. Martin brought on in teasingly attacking subs. More by rote than with any real plans of what to do with them. We've picked up a couple of worst ever records today for club and league. Sadly, you can see why.

5live folk talking about how Brentford changed tactics as their goal was to stay in the league. They're saying Martin has to do the same. So, clearly aren't aware of his outlook. They pointed out that for all the possession against Everton, we had around .74xg.

For me, the following stood out. 'Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who lost the 2016 Democratic presidential primary to Hillary Clinton and the 2020 primary to Biden, said in a statement it was "no great surprise" that working class voters abandoned the party. "First, it was the white working class, and now it is Latino and black workers as well. While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change," he said. "And they're right."' Trump chipped away at a lot of demographics. Harris' camp can look at what they think they didn't do enough of, or did too much of. But when you have classes of people abandoning your party, and you seem to have no plan for change or care much about keeping them, then you're going to lose those votes.

Taking a peek at Florida, the Republican votes exceeded the Democrats at every level of education, except the highest which was equal. Which best describes your education? You have: Never attended college (15%) D 34% R 64% Attended college but received no degree (29%) D 42% R 55% Associate's degree (AA or AS) (19%) D 45% R 54% Bachelor's degree (BA or BS) (21%) D 45% R 54% An advanced degree after a bachelor's degree (such as JD, MA, MBA, MD, PhD) (15%) D 49% R 49%

Excellent. Well done to them. Shame it's an outgoing coach, but gives them a chance to impress.

I heard that Trump felt that someone with an inability to accept legal results, racism, trivialising sexual assault on minors, faking racially motivated incidents, antisemitism and obsessions with nazi accessorising and far right individuals, was too extreme for him.

Absolutely. I was giving one example, but there are plenty of differences you'd expect from different political history there. His non traditional approach, coupled with the folks pulling his strings early on, have given both parties a chance to redefine themselves ahead of the next election. Hopefully one of both realise that there's a winning number of votes in not alienating masses of the electorate.

Couldn't agree with him more.

Thanks Hypo. Sums up a lot of my thoughts. While working class would be left here, Trump has connected with a lot of that base. The Democrats have gone out of their way to not only not engage, but to alienate and demonise them. Their left is left with progressive policies, that aren't as important as the economy to many. Both sides were as bad as each other on this prior to Trump. It's taken someone like that to get the votes of people who were alienated by both sides. That should have set off massive alarm bells last time round. But they didn't learn a thing at the top levels or in the media. I quite enjoyed watching them go through the same lesson last night. That lack of comprehension dawning on them again. "But...but...it can't be us" despite having no empathy for anyone on the other side and adjusting their policies to get votes. Electoral college, popular vote, looks like senate and house to be decided gives him a strong mandate. The Republicans have a lot of work to do in order to take advantage of Trump's presence, for when he's not there. Labour, through ambassador, look to have been building bridges away from their schoolboy sniping when they were in opposition. That's going to be put to the test.

Change

Warning

Not 40% but 41%! You're not fooling anyone Midfield General...or should I say... >tears off mask< Alpi...oh... it wasn't a mask... um... does anyone have a stapler...and a medic... definitely a medic...

Tax

Nothing says equality more than that. 🙂

Which sporting event did you qualify for? 🙂

It's the excitement of looking forward to more successful RussBall.

Not crosses as such, but Bree was bought, in part, for his ability to play the ball from deep, to release players like TP. Very different from Martin's set up. THB seems more likely to do well from corners, these days. Maybe there's some improvement?

Beeb breakdown on the areas that could see each candidate over the line. Eyewateringly expensive https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj0jq134y91o

Old Testament version probably isn't fussed with any of those. 🙂

Also from Sky, Trump already calling foul. A couple of podcasts saying there's behind the scenes blame games already starting up. Donald Trump admits he could lose the election Donald Trump has conceded there is a possibility he might lose the presidential election. ABC's Jonathan Karl asked Mr Trump if there was a chance he could lose. The former president replied: "Yeah, I guess, you know, I guess you could lose, can lose. I mean, that happens, right?" "But I think I have a pretty substantial lead, but, you could say, yeah, yeah, you could lose. Bad things could happen. "You know, things happen, but it's going to be interesting," he added. The Republican nominee also said he believes the outcome of his race against Kamala Harris will be declared tomorrow night. Yesterday, he told a campaign rally in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, the only way he could lose would be if he was cheated, as he once again called into question the integrity of the electoral system.

We don't look as though we're ever going to play to his strengths. There is only Plan A. The whole system isn't set up for his strengths. He doesn't look likely to be able to play into many of the system's strengths (not going to do some of the jobs Adams did). It doesn't look as though the team have had a single session on the scenarios where we need a goal and he comes on to get it. I'm not going to be able not to think of Warwick Davis in a sleeping bag, when TP comes on. 🙂

I've seen that on a few forums (mostly many years back, when they start up). Folk who can't bear to feel there's an argument and that they're losing it. Usually part of all the ID's ganging up on other posters, or validating a position. Failing that, a cry for help. 🙂 Love and light...I mean light and love...darn...

Couldn't find a link, but from Sky. Professor who correctly predicted nine of last 10 elections says he's 'sure' of who will win tomorrow A historian who has successfully predicted nine out of the last 10 elections in the US believes Kamala Harris will win the keys to the White House. Polls have been suggesting it will be a neck-and-neck race between Republican nominee Donald Trump and his Democratic opponent. But Professor Allan Lichtman's system, called "The Keys to the White House", involves disregarding the polls entirely. Instead, 13 metrics on a checklist are used to try and figure out who the successful candidate will be. "Why am I sure that Harris is going to win? Because it's only close on the polls, and my system ignores the polls," Professor Lichtman told CNN. The professor, who correctly predicted Mr Trump's win against Hillary Clinton in 2016, described polls as "snapshots" and said: "People don't respond to pollsters, they lie, they change their minds, and they have to guess who the likely voters are." His system, which he developed in the early 1980s with the Russian geophysicist Vladimir Keilis-Borok, analyses the political landscape through the lens of 13 true-false statements focused on the incumbent president's party. If six or more of the statements are false, then the challenger — in this case, Mr Trump — is predicted to win. As detailed below, his system currently concludes that eight of the 13 keys are in Ms Harris's favour - while three favour her Republican rival. Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. FALSE Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE Incumbency: The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. FALSE Third party: There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. TRUE Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. TRUE Long-term economy: Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. TRUE Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. TRUE Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE Incumbent charisma: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE Challenger charisma: The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. TRUE Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. LEANS FALSE Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. LEANS TRUE The election he got wrong was in 2000, when there were five false keys against the incumbent Democrats and Prof Lichtman predicted Democratic candidate and vice president Al Gore would win. Mr Gore won the popular vote, but Republican nominee George W Bush was declared the winner of the Electoral College by the Supreme Court 36 days after election day, following a lengthy legal battle.

When is a 6 pointer not a 6 pointer? When it has no impact on the PL survival of either. 🙂 Hopefully, we'll have a bit of a bounce from the Stoke and Everton games. It means we're probably going to have to make the best from few chances. But fancy Archer to get us a narrow win.