I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
Holy shit. This would be massive if it ended like this:
Holy fuckknuckles, Ms Boebert's deficit is still around 8,000 votes.
If the Dems gain CO-3, it would mean that two of the three Republican nutjobs have failed to be reelected (Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorne and Lauren Boebert).
My dream would be for the Democrat crazies (aka the Squad) and the Republican crazies to all be defeated.
It is telling that both groups support Putin in his invasion of Ukraine.
I had a thought last night about a very unlikely scenario:
Say the Republicans win, and characteristically ignore the lessons of history and stop US support for Ukraine.
That means Ukraine is screwed (unless we think Europe and others can still support Ukraine enough to prevent Russia taking it over.
But Russia doing that will provoke massive instability in Europe. It will threaten the Baltic and other states, and further hurt their economies.
And who rather likes Europe's economies? China. And which country has been going somewhat colder against Russia over recent weeks? China.
So might China decide it is worth the cost and decide to fill the gap the US has left? Geopolitically it might be a positive thing for them to do, especially amongst some of their biggest customers.
I'm not saying this would happen; it is very unlikely. But it is possible.
It wouldn’t have the capability if it wanted to, and it wouldn’t want to because in that world it would feel its interests were best served by seeing a “Greater Russia” emerge. More likely to be a client state.
I think that's totally wrong. China wants a weak Russia, and the 'Greater Russia' would be stronger. And Europe - which is fairly strongly in favour of maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty, is also a major customer for China. Russia is not.
Helping Ukraine in a defensive capacity also earns China brownie points for when they want to do (ahem) dodgier things.
Disagree with the last bit if you like, because it’s a matter of opinion/assessment. But the available evidence supports the first bit. China can’t yet do out of area Ops in the way the US can at anything like the same scale:
I'm not talking about China setting boots on the ground. Just china 'helping' Ukraine in the same way the US has. There are many aspects to this, many positive for China. Another example is the arms trade: the reputation of Russia's armaments has taken a pasting in the last nine months. China will want to grab many of those exports. What better way than showing them in action (and I have little doubt that modern Chinese weapons are of a better quality than Russia's).
But if they did want boots on the ground (and I don't think they'd do that), then the Ukraine war might be a good learning experience - in the same way that Russia (mis)used Syria - although in that case, Russia does not seem to have learnt enough.
Again, I'm not saying this will happen: but I do think it is a possibility if the US was to pull out.
Neither am I. China doesn’t have the capability, logistically, to do what the US and NATO has done. It’s far more than picking a few bits of kit off the shelf and sticking them on a ship or A/C.
Someone just mentioned that on the show I was listening to - what if De Santis wins by a mile in Florida, which looks likely, but the Trump-endorsed candidates have a relatively poor night elsewhere. The momentum would definitely be with De Santis.
Still no numbers for Nevada, which looks like being key in the Senate race. Arizona also very close, although Walker might win Georgia without a runoff.
I think RDS has this now. In hindsight, it might be the reason why Trump held off an announcement pre-election
Yes but don't we think that Trump is capable of causing RDS a lot of trouble? If this is the way it goes, will the GOP be able to persuade Trump of backing RDS? Or might we have a 3rd big hitter on the ballot, Trump going solo and drawing off support from the Republicans?
If Trump endorsed candidates lose, and Trump's grip on the GOP is removed, then the real winner is America, democracy and the world.
Or you get very hardline Republicans who are just a lot more intelligent than Trump, like Ron de Santis. The thing about Trump is that he's too incompetent to be able to really subvert democracy.
I don't know much about DeSantis. Is he hardline in his politics, or in wanting to subvert democracy?
Someone who has hardcore politics that I disagree with, democratically elected, is far superior to someone willing to subvert democracy even if you agree with their politics.
I don't know that De Santis would subvert democracy, but he is certainly a very hardline Republican.
But, over 200 people have been elected to the House, Senate, or in Statewide contests who described the 2020 election as stolen, according to 538.
Someone just mentioned that on the show I was listening to - what if De Santis wins by a mile in Florida, which looks likely, but the Trump-endorsed candidates have a relatively poor night elsewhere. The momentum would definitely be with De Santis.
Still no numbers for Nevada, which looks like being key in the Senate race. Arizona also very close, although Walker might win Georgia without a runoff.
I think RDS has this now. In hindsight, it might be the reason why Trump held off an announcement pre-election
Yes but don't we think that Trump is capable of causing RDS a lot of trouble? If this is the way it goes, will the GOP be able to persuade Trump of backing RDS? Or might we have a 3rd big hitter on the ballot, Trump going solo and drawing off support from the Republicans?
If Trump endorsed candidates lose, and Trump's grip on the GOP is removed, then the real winner is America, democracy and the world.
Or you get very hardline Republicans who are just a lot more intelligent than Trump, like Ron de Santis. The thing about Trump is that he's too incompetent to be able to really subvert democracy.
I don't know much about DeSantis. Is he hardline in his politics, or in wanting to subvert democracy?
Someone who has hardcore politics that I disagree with, democratically elected, is far superior to someone willing to subvert democracy even if you agree with their politics.
De Santis has disenfranchised more voters than any current politician by subverting the results of a State wide referendum that should have returned voting rights to former convicts.
He's undertaken bills of attainder against corporations who's speech he disagrees with.
He's the "fascist with a bland face" that I have been so worried about.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
The NYT projects 225/226 Republicans, to 209/210 Democrats.
Holy shit. This would be massive if it ended like this:
Holy fuckknuckles, Ms Boebert's deficit is still around 8,000 votes.
If the Dems gain CO-3, it would mean that two of the three Republican nutjobs have failed to be reelected (Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorne and Lauren Boebert).
My dream would be for the Democrat crazies (aka the Squad) and the Republican crazies to all be defeated.
It is telling that both groups support Putin in his invasion of Ukraine.
I had a thought last night about a very unlikely scenario:
Say the Republicans win, and characteristically ignore the lessons of history and stop US support for Ukraine.
That means Ukraine is screwed (unless we think Europe and others can still support Ukraine enough to prevent Russia taking it over.
But Russia doing that will provoke massive instability in Europe. It will threaten the Baltic and other states, and further hurt their economies.
And who rather likes Europe's economies? China. And which country has been going somewhat colder against Russia over recent weeks? China.
So might China decide it is worth the cost and decide to fill the gap the US has left? Geopolitically it might be a positive thing for them to do, especially amongst some of their biggest customers.
I'm not saying this would happen; it is very unlikely. But it is possible.
It wouldn’t have the capability if it wanted to, and it wouldn’t want to because in that world it would feel its interests were best served by seeing a “Greater Russia” emerge. More likely to be a client state.
I think that's totally wrong. China wants a weak Russia, and the 'Greater Russia' would be stronger. And Europe - which is fairly strongly in favour of maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty, is also a major customer for China. Russia is not.
Helping Ukraine in a defensive capacity also earns China brownie points for when they want to do (ahem) dodgier things.
Disagree with the last bit if you like, because it’s a matter of opinion/assessment. But the available evidence supports the first bit. China can’t yet do out of area Ops in the way the US can at anything like the same scale:
I'm not talking about China setting boots on the ground. Just china 'helping' Ukraine in the same way the US has. There are many aspects to this, many positive for China. Another example is the arms trade: the reputation of Russia's armaments has taken a pasting in the last nine months. China will want to grab many of those exports. What better way than showing them in action (and I have little doubt that modern Chinese weapons are of a better quality than Russia's).
But if they did want boots on the ground (and I don't think they'd do that), then the Ukraine war might be a good learning experience - in the same way that Russia (mis)used Syria - although in that case, Russia does not seem to have learnt enough.
Again, I'm not saying this will happen: but I do think it is a possibility if the US was to pull out.
Neither am I. China doesn’t have the capability, logistically, to do what the US and NATO has done. It’s far more than picking a few bits of kit off the shelf and sticking them on a ship or A/C.
It is more. But I think you underestimate their capabilities. In addition: do China want to *learn* how to improve those capabilities? If so, what better way of doing it?
Holy shit. This would be massive if it ended like this:
Holy fuckknuckles, Ms Boebert's deficit is still around 8,000 votes.
If the Dems gain CO-3, it would mean that two of the three Republican nutjobs have failed to be reelected (Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorne and Lauren Boebert).
My dream would be for the Democrat crazies (aka the Squad) and the Republican crazies to all be defeated.
It is telling that both groups support Putin in his invasion of Ukraine.
I had a thought last night about a very unlikely scenario:
Say the Republicans win, and characteristically ignore the lessons of history and stop US support for Ukraine.
That means Ukraine is screwed (unless we think Europe and others can still support Ukraine enough to prevent Russia taking it over.
But Russia doing that will provoke massive instability in Europe. It will threaten the Baltic and other states, and further hurt their economies.
And who rather likes Europe's economies? China. And which country has been going somewhat colder against Russia over recent weeks? China.
So might China decide it is worth the cost and decide to fill the gap the US has left? Geopolitically it might be a positive thing for them to do, especially amongst some of their biggest customers.
I'm not saying this would happen; it is very unlikely. But it is possible.
It wouldn’t have the capability if it wanted to, and it wouldn’t want to because in that world it would feel its interests were best served by seeing a “Greater Russia” emerge. More likely to be a client state.
I think that's totally wrong. China wants a weak Russia, and the 'Greater Russia' would be stronger. And Europe - which is fairly strongly in favour of maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty, is also a major customer for China. Russia is not.
Helping Ukraine in a defensive capacity also earns China brownie points for when they want to do (ahem) dodgier things.
Disagree with the last bit if you like, because it’s a matter of opinion/assessment. But the available evidence supports the first bit. China can’t yet do out of area Ops in the way the US can at anything like the same scale:
I'm not talking about China setting boots on the ground. Just china 'helping' Ukraine in the same way the US has. There are many aspects to this, many positive for China. Another example is the arms trade: the reputation of Russia's armaments has taken a pasting in the last nine months. China will want to grab many of those exports. What better way than showing them in action (and I have little doubt that modern Chinese weapons are of a better quality than Russia's).
But if they did want boots on the ground (and I don't think they'd do that), then the Ukraine war might be a good learning experience - in the same way that Russia (mis)used Syria - although in that case, Russia does not seem to have learnt enough.
Again, I'm not saying this will happen: but I do think it is a possibility if the US was to pull out.
Neither am I. China doesn’t have the capability, logistically, to do what the US and NATO has done. It’s far more than picking a few bits of kit off the shelf and sticking them on a ship or A/C.
Also, in a forced choice, NATO and the EU would prefer Ukraine to be a Russian satrapy than a Chinese one. So Rzeszow airport, etc. may not be available to this hypothetical rescue mission by the Chinese A-Team.
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
Good news for Sunak (incumbents can hang on despite economic headwinds and unfavourable polls) and good news for Starmer (the world is tired of the right, the centre left look stronger and fresh).
Their political futures are close to a zero sum game from here, so hard to see it can be good news for both of them.
Holy shit. This would be massive if it ended like this:
Holy fuckknuckles, Ms Boebert's deficit is still around 8,000 votes.
If the Dems gain CO-3, it would mean that two of the three Republican nutjobs have failed to be reelected (Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorne and Lauren Boebert).
My dream would be for the Democrat crazies (aka the Squad) and the Republican crazies to all be defeated.
It is telling that both groups support Putin in his invasion of Ukraine.
I had a thought last night about a very unlikely scenario:
Say the Republicans win, and characteristically ignore the lessons of history and stop US support for Ukraine.
That means Ukraine is screwed (unless we think Europe and others can still support Ukraine enough to prevent Russia taking it over.
But Russia doing that will provoke massive instability in Europe. It will threaten the Baltic and other states, and further hurt their economies.
And who rather likes Europe's economies? China. And which country has been going somewhat colder against Russia over recent weeks? China.
So might China decide it is worth the cost and decide to fill the gap the US has left? Geopolitically it might be a positive thing for them to do, especially amongst some of their biggest customers.
I'm not saying this would happen; it is very unlikely. But it is possible.
It wouldn’t have the capability if it wanted to, and it wouldn’t want to because in that world it would feel its interests were best served by seeing a “Greater Russia” emerge. More likely to be a client state.
I think that's totally wrong. China wants a weak Russia, and the 'Greater Russia' would be stronger. And Europe - which is fairly strongly in favour of maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty, is also a major customer for China. Russia is not.
Helping Ukraine in a defensive capacity also earns China brownie points for when they want to do (ahem) dodgier things.
Disagree with the last bit if you like, because it’s a matter of opinion/assessment. But the available evidence supports the first bit. China can’t yet do out of area Ops in the way the US can at anything like the same scale:
I'm not talking about China setting boots on the ground. Just china 'helping' Ukraine in the same way the US has. There are many aspects to this, many positive for China. Another example is the arms trade: the reputation of Russia's armaments has taken a pasting in the last nine months. China will want to grab many of those exports. What better way than showing them in action (and I have little doubt that modern Chinese weapons are of a better quality than Russia's).
But if they did want boots on the ground (and I don't think they'd do that), then the Ukraine war might be a good learning experience - in the same way that Russia (mis)used Syria - although in that case, Russia does not seem to have learnt enough.
Again, I'm not saying this will happen: but I do think it is a possibility if the US was to pull out.
Neither am I. China doesn’t have the capability, logistically, to do what the US and NATO has done. It’s far more than picking a few bits of kit off the shelf and sticking them on a ship or A/C.
Also, in a forced choice, NATO and the EU would prefer Ukraine to be a Russian satrapy than a Chinese one. So Rzeszow airport, etc. may not be available to this hypothetical rescue mission by the Chinese A-Team.
LOL, no. That's not what I'm saying. And I don't think Poland and the Baltics would agree with your first line.
edit: but in reality what would happen is this: *) US stops aiding Ukraine because of republican shitbaggery. *) China says "we'll help Ukraine!" *) US suddenly says: "Oh, urm, yes, look at these weapons we've found under the sofa. How did they end up in Ukraine? Oh, and here's some more..."
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Every day, just like Johnson, just like Truss, Sunak sends out a minister who should be speaking about things that matter to people, to defend the indefensible conduct of a ministerial colleague. They have presided over a collapse in standards in public life https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1590252028525424640
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Every day, just like Johnson, just like Truss, Sunak sends out a minister who should be speaking about things that matter to people, to defend the indefensible conduct of a ministerial colleague. They have presided over a collapse in standards in public life https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1590252028525424640
It's not a collapse: it's always been like this. See Mandelson for an example. Or Tom Watson.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
Worth just focusing on that statement for a minute, thinking about how vile the implications are, and thanking God for the Electoral Commission,
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
Worth just focusing on that statement for a minute, thinking about how vile the implications are, and thanking God for the Electoral Commission,
Can anyone tell us why the Senate is expected to be 50-50.
As far as I can see its 48-49 with Dems ahead marginally in final 3.
Presumably one of these 3 is expected to go GOP?
Arizona and Nevada are expected to come back to the GOP as the rural votes come in. There will be a runoff in Georgia, and the 2% Libertarian vote is likely to break to the GOP as well.
Still very tight though, all three races could go both ways.
Not as historic as this day in 1989, but if it sees the end of Trump then today is an important day. Johnson, Truss and Trump all seen off in just a few months! Crazy politics hits the wall.
Certainly better news but it remains difficult to be excited by the overall quality of the political class of all colours right now in most places. I mean how would you characterise the obvious senility of Biden and Fetterman...
Fetterman had a stroke, from which he is quite likely to fully recover. 'Obvious' ...
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Contrast that with the polling before the election. The pollsters will have to make adjustments.
Before the next election, you might want to find a better way to poll anyone under the age of 30 since they would rather pick up a pinless grenade than a call from an unknown number.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
The NYT projects 225/226 Republicans, to 209/210 Democrats.
Quite possible the Dems win back the house in 2024 if they pick the right Presidential candidate
I’m feeling rather confident on my DeSantis 2024 bets.
If Trump doesn't get Rep Nom what's to stop him filing and running as an independent ?
He'd split the base and deny De Santis victory. Biden wins.
I doubt that actually election results will stop Trump, when he's been so successful with the election-stealing rhetoric.
I expect that he's still very good odds for the nomination.
I'm staying on him for Nom, only covering myself with DeSantis to neutral, and laying Trump for the Presidency.
Other big bet is Biden for next President. I agree with @Pulpstar that those are crazy good odds.
I'm on the other side. My current largest bet is a lay of Trump for the nomination. I'm prepared to trade the position, but sub evens looked exceptional value.
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Maybe but the GOP have still won some key Governor and state legislature races, mainly in the South, pro life activists will use to try and entrench abortion restrictions.
They are not that bothered about the failure of the expected GOP red wave in the US Congress
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
Worth just focusing on that statement for a minute, thinking about how vile the implications are, and thanking God for the Electoral Commission,
Elected judges too - what a farce.
Elected prosecutors and Attourneys General too.
There’s an unexpectedly tight race for the governor of Oregon, as the populace are fed up with rising crime becuase the AG won’t prosecute rioters and shoplifters.
Laura Kelly 1.8pc ahead in the Kansas governor vote with 97pc counted. Not called yet though. A couple of counties good for the reds have a lot more left to count but they are too small to swing it.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
Worth just focusing on that statement for a minute, thinking about how vile the implications are, and thanking God for the Electoral Commission,
Elected judges too - what a farce.
Yes, we set a high bar.
“I could have been a Judge, but I never had the Latin……. I would much prefer to be a judge than a coal miner because of the absence of falling coal”.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Cant see it, he needs to get over 2% ahead given the Libertarian to reach 50% and hes only 12k ahead right now
30k ahead now and the remaining votes to be counted look to be from areas that should be very good for him, like Fulton County.
But looks like he's probably going to fall just short. I think it will be within rounding of 50/48/2 but just short of 50 rather than just over it.
There are a hell of a lot of counties in GA. They individually have small votes but cumulatively add up and most of them are for Walker. Warnock actually doesn't have that many votes left in.the big urban areas.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Cant see it, he needs to get over 2% ahead given the Libertarian to reach 50% and hes only 12k ahead right now
30k ahead now and the remaining votes to be counted look to be from areas that should be very good for him, like Fulton County.
But looks like he's probably going to fall just short. I think it will be within rounding of 50/48/2 but just short of 50 rather than just over it.
My fag packet says he might get 35 to 40,000 more on his lead from the Atlanta counties but thats not enough and the remainder should be a few thousand better for Walker. I reckon Warnock 'wins' ca 49.5 to 48.5
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
The NYT projects 225/226 Republicans, to 209/210 Democrats.
Tight. The Smarkets band betting breaks at 209/210, with me green on 210.
I'm not sure why US polling is being criticised. On the whole, it looks like the pollsters put in quite a good performance.
In all likelihood, the Republicans will lead in vote share by about 1.5% for the House, with about 225/226 seats. That's in line with the 538 average, and only about 1% less than the RCP average.
What this shows is that candidate selection still matters. If you select a bad candidate, a very small, but noticeable, minority of your normal supporters won't vote for them. The Republicans ought to have won Georgia fairly easily, and to have held Pennsylvania, given the national environment is more favourable than it was two years ago. Their candidates ensured they didn't.
The national polls have been fairly accurate, but re the 538 average worth pointing this out:
"This year, there are considerably more districts with no Democratic nominee than with no Republican. Specifically, there are 23 House districts with no Democrat on the ballot3 but 12 with no Republican. Moreover, the districts with no Democratic nominee tend to be more competitive than those with no Republican one, meaning that Democrats are sacrificing more votes.
It’s slightly tricky to calculate exactly how big this effect is, but it will likely shift the final House popular vote margin by at least 1 percentage point toward Republicans, and probably more like 1.5 percentage points. In other words, if the final generic ballot margin was Republicans by 3 percentage points, we’d expect them to win the House popular vote by more like 4.5 percentage points because of all the districts with missing Democratic candidates." https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-3-big-questions-i-still-have-about-election-day/
The 538 final generic ballot polling average had R +1.2, so if the popular vote ends up R +1.5 when all the votes are counted, the 538 polling average was also effectively overestimating R by about 1% when taking into account the effect of Democrats not contesting seats. Still pretty good.
The 538 final forecasts also look OK.
For the Senate they predicted an average of 51 seats for the Republicans, which isn't looking too bad - might end up one too many?
For the House they predicted an average of 230 seats for the Republicans, which also looks like it might be a few too many, but still not bad.
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Maybe but the GOP have still won some key Governor and state legislature races, mainly in the South, pro life activists will use to try and entrench abortion restrictions.
They are not that bothered about the failure of the expected GOP red wave in the US Congress
.. so abortion will still be an issue in 2 years time.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Cant see it, he needs to get over 2% ahead given the Libertarian to reach 50% and hes only 12k ahead right now
30k ahead now and the remaining votes to be counted look to be from areas that should be very good for him, like Fulton County.
But looks like he's probably going to fall just short. I think it will be within rounding of 50/48/2 but just short of 50 rather than just over it.
There are a hell of a lot of counties in GA. They individually have small votes but cumulatively add up and most of them are for Walker. Warnock actually doesn't have that many votes left in.the big urban areas.
Georgia has the second highest number of counties of any state. Texas is first.
So far the red wave looks like more of a red trickle.
Democrats likely to hold the Senate and while the GOP take the House it is with far fewer gains than they made in the 1994 and 2010 midterms and fewer too than the Democrats made in 2018
While that's so, bear in mind in 1994 and 2010, the Republicans were starting from a considerably lower base (as were the Democrats in 2018).
What I hadn't appreciated is that boundary changes actually favoured the Democrats this time, after State Supreme Courts struck down redistricting in Ohio and North Carolina.
The Boundary changes were a mild GOP gain. 2010 had already seem extreme GOP gerrymandering so there wasn't much more they could do but they tried and this timeout the US Supreme Court used the shadow docket to allow some of the GOP extra gerrymanders to stand whilst simultaneously blocking Dem attempts at gerrymanders.
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
Nate Silver reckons that gains for the Republicans in the State Supreme Court elections will enable them to push through the boundary changes they want in NC and Ohio.
Worth just focusing on that statement for a minute, thinking about how vile the implications are, and thanking God for the Electoral Commission,
Elected judges too - what a farce.
One of the judges on the Ohio State Supreme court is the son of the Govenor.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
The NYT projects 225/226 Republicans, to 209/210 Democrats.
Quite possible the Dems win back the house in 2024 if they pick the right Presidential candidate
People in the UK have a tendency to assume the incumbent President won't stand again. This is a fallacy.
If he stays fit, he runs again. And by fit I don't mean his mental acuity.
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Contrast that with the polling before the election. The pollsters will have to make adjustments.
Before the next election, you might want to find a better way to poll anyone under the age of 30 since they would rather pick up a pinless grenade than a call from an unknown number.
Someone should do a poll to see the correlation between willingness to answer an unknown caller and voting intention.
My contention is, of course, that those of us on the left are much more savvy, astute, careful, intelligent, good-looking, and just generally better people in every conceivable way. That includes resistance to answering unknown callers.
Can anyone tell us why the Senate is expected to be 50-50.
As far as I can see its 48-49 with Dems ahead marginally in final 3.
Presumably one of these 3 is expected to go GOP?
Arizona and Nevada are expected to come back to the GOP as the rural votes come in. There will be a runoff in Georgia, and the 2% Libertarian vote is likely to break to the GOP as well.
Still very tight though, all three races could go both ways.
The other factor is that the GOP need 51 today/tomorrow/whenever they eventually get around to counting the votes. If they don't, then as with 2020 outside blue money will flood the state for the runoff.
Put a toe on territory they believe is theirs they'll come at you or make a lot of noises about coming at you. But involvement in wars of foreign aggression not directed at the Central Kingdom and many miles away ain't happening.
Can anyone tell us why the Senate is expected to be 50-50.
As far as I can see its 48-49 with Dems ahead marginally in final 3.
Presumably one of these 3 is expected to go GOP?
Arizona and Nevada are expected to come back to the GOP as the rural votes come in. There will be a runoff in Georgia, and the 2% Libertarian vote is likely to break to the GOP as well.
Still very tight though, all three races could go both ways.
3.2 available for Walker if you think he gets enough of the Lib 2pc.
Just listening to Today on R4. I'm not a great fan of Justin Webb, but on US politics, he's utterly clueless both as a reporter and interviewer. Just awful.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
It is the worst midterms performance for the Opposition party to that in the White House since 2002 certainly when the 9/11 effect boosted the GOP of President Bush at Democrats expense
CNN says that abortion was the second most important issue and for those that had it as the most important the Dems won 76:23. Maybe this should called the Dobbs election after all.
Contrast that with the polling before the election. The pollsters will have to make adjustments.
Before the next election, you might want to find a better way to poll anyone under the age of 30 since they would rather pick up a pinless grenade than a call from an unknown number.
Someone should do a poll to see the correlation between willingness to answer an unknown caller and voting intention.
My contention is, of course, that those of us on the left are much more savvy, astute, careful, intelligent, good-looking, and just generally better people in every conceivable way. That includes resistance to answering unknown callers.
(I may be biased of course.)
This the US. The Republican voters can’t hear the phone ringing through the tinfoil hat.
This was the man who stood in the way when Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election results. Trump phoned him personally to demand he “find me another 11,000 votes”.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
It’s one of those things we have that works, which we must never lose because it would be impossible to get back.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
At least it is transparent. If you believe that UK politicians don't influence boundaries I have a bridge to sell you.
I logged off last night with people commenting about how smug the Fox News hosts were looking.
Rather better news it seems to be waking up to.
Hopefully GA can avoid a run-off. Looking tight there.
Yes that was me and they don't look nearly so smug now. The Democrats have really done well in this cycle. It is hard to get a clear comprehensive picture but so far the Dems have gained 3 House seats and lost 8. A lot of the closest races still to declare, of course, but the idea of a red wave has been binned. Fetterman gives them some cover in the Senate too. Its particularly pleasing to see so many of Trump's candidates failing.
The NYT projects 225/226 Republicans, to 209/210 Democrats.
Tight. The Smarkets band betting breaks at 209/210, with me green on 210.
One of my best bets was on Republican Houss seats 210-219 at 16/1.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
They don't really, the GOP would need to have won far more state governor races than they did to have control over swing states electoral processes
Put a toe on territory they believe is theirs they'll come at you or make a lot of noises about coming at you. But involvement in wars of foreign aggression not directed at the Central Kingdom and many miles away ain't happening.
I agree. China has no ambition in the Ukraine, and apart from not wanting nuclear war, is only interested to see what weapons work, and how NATO behaves. It has enough issues domestically and next door to not want to be involved.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
At least it is transparent. If you believe that UK politicians don't influence boundaries I have a bridge to sell you.
There's a difference between influencing and deciding. And even the minority party, whichever it is, has influence.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
Operatives as well as the politicians on stage.
As with campaign finance, the status quo creates an ecosystem that benefits from the status quo.
This looks like it 'could' be another in a list of recent examples where pundits got it wrong.
@rcs1000 called this right when he predicted the Dems would outperform the recent doomsday scenarios.
And in the UK: I am certain that Labour's chances of an overall majority after 2024 are significantly underestimated by pundits. There's money to be made betting against the lemmings. But you need to know what you're doing and have nerves of steel.
- On left, NYT front page day before 2018 mid-terms under Trump. Headline—properly—is about uncertainty. As it happened, Dems picked up 41 seats in House.
- On right, NYT front page today. Lead story and "analysis" are about doom for Dems.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
At least it is transparent. If you believe that UK politicians don't influence boundaries I have a bridge to sell you.
Of course there’s inputs and discussions on boundaries, but they are not imposed by the incumbents on their opponents, as they are in the US.
One of the key features of a democracy, is that those who lose elections accept that fact. One of the features of the last few US elections, is that many of those who lost haven’t accepted their loss, with various conspiracy theories and false narratives as to why that may be the case.
There was quite a lot of talk of dodgy Republican-leaning polls being released in the run-up to the vote in order to demotivate Democratic voters and to create stolen election narratives for losing GOP candidates. That looks like it could well have happened.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
I think the case to be made with those people is not the “you’re proposing something morally wrong” case but rather the self interested “eventually the other side will win and do it to you” case.
American politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of being morally wrong, they see everything through the lens of gaining partisan advantage.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
At least it is transparent. If you believe that UK politicians don't influence boundaries I have a bridge to sell you.
There's a difference between influencing and deciding. And even the minority party, whichever it is, has influence.
Yes, and parties not in government are no less successful than parties in government in influencing the results.
Just listening to Today on R4. I'm not a great fan of Justin Webb, but on US politics, he's utterly clueless both as a reporter and interviewer. Just awful.
This looks like it 'could' be another in a list of recent examples where pundits got it wrong.
@rcs1000 called this right when he predicted the Dems would outperform the recent doomsday scenarios.
And in the UK: I am certain that Labour's chances of an overall majority after 2024 are significantly underestimated by pundits. There's money to be made betting against the lemmings. But you need to know what you're doing and have nerves of steel.
You really don’t need “nerves of steel”
Just don’t bet more than you can afford to lose 😉
I'm not sure the Spreads really work like that.
I remember staying up two years ago and I studied carefully the results in Florida. Everyone was 'whoa the latino vote has gone Trump ergo Biden is toast.' But I mined into the suburbs and saw a subtle but vital swing to Biden there. Indebted to CNN for the hat-tip on that.
So I went big on the Spreads for a Biden win. Against the markets. One of the most nerve-wracking nights of my life. But it paid off. Could-of lost big and was trembling in fear for a couple of hours. Won big.
Thing about Spread betting is that you can come a cropper if you get it wrong.
It is the worst midterms performance for the Opposition party to that in the White House since 2002 certainly when the 9/11 effect boosted the GOP of President Bush at Democrats expense
Yes, in context it really is extraordinarily bad for the GOP.
High inflation, economy in trouble, President negatively rated.
- On left, NYT front page day before 2018 mid-terms under Trump. Headline—properly—is about uncertainty. As it happened, Dems picked up 41 seats in House.
- On right, NYT front page today. Lead story and "analysis" are about doom for Dems.
It is the worst midterms performance for the Opposition party to that in the White House since 2002 certainly when the 9/11 effect boosted the GOP of President Bush at Democrats expense
It could be a best of all worlds scenario (for my prefences): Trump damaged, crazies on both sides underperform. Possibility of Trump or Trump-clone as GOP nominee diminished, therefore Dems need to tack to the centre and sideline the identarians in 2024. Crackpots and Putinists marginalised. American democracy back. We've several steps to go yet, but last night was a small step in the right direction.
Dem lead in Nevada down to 5000 votes, lead in Vegas is only 28,000 with 84% counted. I favour a flip here.
Ralston disagrees:
"With Clark done for the day, and all three Dem House incumbents ahead, it seems that all three will win because the mail deluge should only increase their leads unless something really weird is going on."
Anyone else wishing DeSantis could come to the UK and sort out the Conservative party? Florida is where woke comes to die! And in the process a swing state turns solidly Republican. Rishi Sunak and his fellow wets in the Tories should watch and learn.
This looks like it 'could' be another in a list of recent examples where pundits got it wrong.
@rcs1000 called this right when he predicted the Dems would outperform the recent doomsday scenarios.
And in the UK: I am certain that Labour's chances of an overall majority after 2024 are significantly underestimated by pundits. There's money to be made betting against the lemmings. But you need to know what you're doing and have nerves of steel.
You really don’t need “nerves of steel”
Just don’t bet more than you can afford to lose 😉
I'm not sure the Spreads really work like that.
I remember staying up two years ago and I studied carefully the results in Florida. Everyone was 'whoa the latino vote has gone Trump ergo Biden is toast.' But I mined into the suburbs and saw a subtle but vital swing to Biden there. Indebted to CNN for the hat-tip on that.
So I went big on the Spreads for a Biden win. Against the markets. One of the most nerve-wracking nights of my life. But it paid off. Could-of lost big and was trembling in fear for a couple of hours. Won big.
Thing about Spread betting is that you can come a cropper if you get it wrong.
Spread betting is very painful if you get it wrong. I have dabbled in the past, but the potential liabilities are not comfortable for me. I have deleted my account.
CNN: Most of the outstanding vote in Clark County is Mail in - which should be good for Dems.
Laxalt takes running total lead.
There are about 100,00 votes left in each of Clark and Washoe plus a few thousand in the others. Its down to how well Dems did in mail in versus on the day voting in Washoe/rural areas
Put a toe on territory they believe is theirs they'll come at you or make a lot of noises about coming at you. But involvement in wars of foreign aggression not directed at the Central Kingdom and many miles away ain't happening.
Must be some itchy trigger fingers though in Beijing. Their wargaming will show they'll never have a better chance to retake a massive swathe of Russia, including Vladivostok, historically within China.
Which would be about the best news Ukraine could get out of China.
This looks like it 'could' be another in a list of recent examples where pundits got it wrong.
@rcs1000 called this right when he predicted the Dems would outperform the recent doomsday scenarios.
And in the UK: I am certain that Labour's chances of an overall majority after 2024 are significantly underestimated by pundits. There's money to be made betting against the lemmings. But you need to know what you're doing and have nerves of steel.
You really don’t need “nerves of steel”
Just don’t bet more than you can afford to lose 😉
I'm not sure the Spreads really work like that.
I remember staying up two years ago and I studied carefully the results in Florida. Everyone was 'whoa the latino vote has gone Trump ergo Biden is toast.' But I mined into the suburbs and saw a subtle but vital swing to Biden there. Indebted to CNN for the hat-tip on that.
So I went big on the Spreads for a Biden win. Against the markets. One of the most nerve-wracking nights of my life. But it paid off. Could-of lost big and was trembling in fear for a couple of hours. Won big.
Thing about Spread betting is that you can come a cropper if you get it wrong.
Spread betting is very painful if you get it wrong. I have dabbled in the past, but the potential liabilities are not comfortable for me. I have deleted my account.
I bought Con seats at 385 in 2017. Not playing that game again!
Anyone else wishing DeSantis could come to the UK and sort out the Conservative party? Florida is where woke comes to die! And in the process a swing state turns solidly Republican. Rishi Sunak and his fellow wets in the Tories should watch and learn.
Dem lead in Nevada down to 5000 votes, lead in Vegas is only 28,000 with 84% counted. I favour a flip here.
Ralston disagrees:
"With Clark done for the day, and all three Dem House incumbents ahead, it seems that all three will win because the mail deluge should only increase their leads unless something really weird is going on."
Comments
But, over 200 people have been elected to the House, Senate, or in Statewide contests who described the 2020 election as stolen, according to 538.
These before and after photos at @laurenboebert’s election party are giving me life
https://twitter.com/keithedwards/status/1590212487567187968/photo/1
He's undertaken bills of attainder against corporations who's speech he disagrees with.
He's the "fascist with a bland face" that I have been so worried about.
Edit - ooooh you sneak you corrected it!
Ohio did get a new GOP drawn map for this election that shifted thing in their favour.
edit: but in reality what would happen is this:
*) US stops aiding Ukraine because of republican shitbaggery.
*) China says "we'll help Ukraine!"
*) US suddenly says: "Oh, urm, yes, look at these weapons we've found under the sofa. How did they end up in Ukraine? Oh, and here's some more..."
Which issue matters most in vote…
36% abortion
29% inflation
11% crime
9% gun policy
7% immigration
https://twitter.com/EwallWice/status/1590234029638701056
Every day, just like Johnson, just like Truss, Sunak sends out a minister who should be speaking about things that matter to people, to defend the indefensible conduct of a ministerial colleague. They have presided over a collapse in standards in public life
https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1590252028525424640
Overall change:
Dem leaning +6
Rep leaning =
Competitive -6
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/
But looks like he's probably going to fall just short. I think it will be within rounding of 50/48/2 but just short of 50 rather than just over it.
As far as I can see its 48-49 with Dems ahead marginally in final 3.
Presumably one of these 3 is expected to go GOP?
Still very tight though, all three races could go both ways.
'Obvious' ...
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1590223092315750403
My current largest bet is a lay of Trump for the nomination.
I'm prepared to trade the position, but sub evens looked exceptional value.
They are not that bothered about the failure of the expected GOP red wave in the US Congress
There’s an unexpectedly tight race for the governor of Oregon, as the populace are fed up with rising crime becuase the AG won’t prosecute rioters and shoplifters.
“I could have been a Judge, but I never had the Latin……. I would much prefer to be a judge than a coal miner because of the absence of falling coal”.
One possible outcome if this is not the expected Red Wave is that it may give Republicans pause for thought. Maybe the rush to the anti-democratic, conspiracist, far-right is to as smart as it looked a week ago.
That said, if they now control the election process in key swing states they can probably do as they wish.
"This year, there are considerably more districts with no Democratic nominee than with no Republican. Specifically, there are 23 House districts with no Democrat on the ballot3 but 12 with no Republican. Moreover, the districts with no Democratic nominee tend to be more competitive than those with no Republican one, meaning that Democrats are sacrificing more votes.
It’s slightly tricky to calculate exactly how big this effect is, but it will likely shift the final House popular vote margin by at least 1 percentage point toward Republicans, and probably more like 1.5 percentage points. In other words, if the final generic ballot margin was Republicans by 3 percentage points, we’d expect them to win the House popular vote by more like 4.5 percentage points because of all the districts with missing Democratic candidates."
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-3-big-questions-i-still-have-about-election-day/
The 538 final generic ballot polling average had R +1.2, so if the popular vote ends up R +1.5 when all the votes are counted, the 538 polling average was also effectively overestimating R by about 1% when taking into account the effect of Democrats not contesting seats. Still pretty good.
The 538 final forecasts also look OK.
For the Senate they predicted an average of 51 seats for the Republicans, which isn't looking too bad - might end up one too many?
For the House they predicted an average of 230 seats for the Republicans, which also looks like it might be a few too many, but still not bad.
No, he does not recuse himself on any case.
If he stays fit, he runs again. And by fit I don't mean his mental acuity.
My contention is, of course, that those of us on the left are much more savvy, astute, careful, intelligent, good-looking, and just generally better people in every conceivable way. That includes resistance to answering unknown callers.
(I may be biased of course.)
Put a toe on territory they believe is theirs they'll come at you or make a lot of noises about coming at you. But involvement in wars of foreign aggression not directed at the Central Kingdom and many miles away ain't happening.
And this is a dreadful performance for the GOP for a midterm. Dems might well win the popular vote in the House. (They won it by 8.4 in 2018)
https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/1590191343833206784
I'm not a great fan of Justin Webb, but on US politics, he's utterly clueless both as a reporter and interviewer. Just awful.
Is there any other first-world country that lets politicians micro-manage the process of the elections themselves - not just the boundaries (they even coined a word for that!), but details such as the locations and opening hours of individual polling stations?
the US States really need a boundary commission and an electoral commission, in the same way as in the UK. A handful of States have the former, but politicians don’t want to give up the power they have.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1590258300725399552
As with campaign finance, the status quo creates an ecosystem that benefits from the status quo.
"Well, I think if they win, I should get all the credit. If they lose, I should not be blamed at all."
https://twitter.com/mattwilstein/status/1590105710440112128
Just don’t bet more than you can afford to lose 😉
From yesterday:
https://twitter.com/JamesFallows/status/1589680325495496704
Now this is interesting:
- On left, NYT front page day before 2018 mid-terms under Trump. Headline—properly—is about uncertainty.
As it happened, Dems picked up 41 seats in House.
- On right, NYT front page today. Lead story and "analysis" are about doom for Dems.
C'mon guys.
Clark itself is now 51/46.
Not a good vote dump for Cortez Masto - but still favourite on Betfair.
One of the key features of a democracy, is that those who lose elections accept that fact.
One of the features of the last few US elections, is that many of those who lost haven’t accepted their loss, with various conspiracy theories and false narratives as to why that may be the case.
I remember staying up two years ago and I studied carefully the results in Florida. Everyone was 'whoa the latino vote has gone Trump ergo Biden is toast.' But I mined into the suburbs and saw a subtle but vital swing to Biden there. Indebted to CNN for the hat-tip on that.
So I went big on the Spreads for a Biden win. Against the markets. One of the most nerve-wracking nights of my life. But it paid off. Could-of lost big and was trembling in fear for a couple of hours. Won big.
Thing about Spread betting is that you can come a cropper if you get it wrong.
High inflation, economy in trouble, President negatively rated.
And yet the red wave never happened.
Also curious about how many seats are in the Senate
https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1590192748921249793
Laxalt takes running total lead.
We've several steps to go yet, but last night was a small step in the right direction.
"With Clark done for the day, and all three Dem House incumbents ahead, it seems that all three will win because the mail deluge should only increase their leads unless something really weird is going on."
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1590262995543724032?s=20&t=_8SUQhpN8s43t9Aeq2oepA
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2022/us/results
The numbers will be off the charts.
Anyone else wishing DeSantis could come to the UK and sort out the Conservative party?
Florida is where woke comes to die! And in the process a swing state turns solidly Republican.
Rishi Sunak and his fellow wets in the Tories should watch and learn.
https://twitter.com/danwootton/status/1590189429028966401
https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1590166282267406338/video/1
Same discrepancy in Arizona, where Lake is a couple of points up compared to her Senate counterpart.
Which would be about the best news Ukraine could get out of China.
If you’ve been following Scottish politics over the last decade, you will certainly recognise the above claim.
Many people have raised an eyebrow at the figure. But until now it has gone largely unchallenged.
These Islands has painstakingly investigated its provenance, and uncovered a remarkable story:
The 25% claim is not true
The Scottish Government has attempted to justify it with obviously flawed calculations
The Scottish Government has known for some time that the claim cannot be justified, and yet the SNP continues to push it
A realistic figure is 4-6%
https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publications/i384/wrong_with_the_wind.aspx
Warnock also leads in Georgia even if he fails to get over 50% as required to avoid a runoff