Howdy, Stranger!

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

Trump back up to a 36% betting chance for the GOP 2024 nomination – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 16 in General
imageTrump back up to a 36% betting chance for the GOP 2024 nomination – politicalbetting.com

So Trump has made his announcement about his plan to run in 2024 and he’s already filed his papers so he is an official nominee. That of itself resolves one betting market on whether he would be a runner. The submission of the papers makes it official.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • DayTripperDayTripper Posts: 121
    Whey to go.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920
    Trump is going to bang on for two years about how his mind is sharp as a tack - and Biden is completely ga-ga.

    And all those clips of Biden appearing, frankly, ga-ga are going to be played over and over and over for the next two years.

    Expect Trump to major on health records. "I have made mine public." The worry must be that the Democrats keep Biden in place and by the time it is too late to replace him, they have to keep him out the public eye because he is making too many gaffes for Republican attack ads. And "Where's Joe?" becomes the new "Where's Wally?"

    There needs to be an alternative Democrat candidate ready to go, just in case.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920

    Apparently it is milk and cheese causing most of the inflation at the moment. Personally, from here, I think things can only get butter.

    But only marg-inally.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 36,143
    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 1,834

    Apparently it is milk and cheese causing most of the inflation at the moment. Personally, from here, I think things can only get butter.

    But only marg-inally.
    As my rich neighbour with a herd of holsteins would admit, who dairies wins.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,501

    Apparently it is milk and cheese causing most of the inflation at the moment. Personally, from here, I think things can only get butter.

    But only marg-inally.
    As my rich neighbour with a herd of holsteins would admit, who dairies wins.
    He's not talking bullocks
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705
    3.6 looks way too short for Desantis for the presidency to me. It's a treble at this point,

    1st he's got to announce to run. Probable but not 100% likely.
    Then he's got to beat Trump
    Then he's got to beat Biden.

    He had a great result in Florida, but he's not a 5-2 shot.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 104,435
    edited November 16
    Reliving my glorious betting strategy of early 2016 and I’ve got to say Trump is a lay.

    I reckon the January 6th coup d’état attempt was a Salisbury moment for Trump.

    In the UK it turned Corbyn from harmless old grandad into a malevolent force.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981

    Trump is going to bang on for two years about how his mind is sharp as a tack...

    Listening to last night's speech, good luck with that.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705
    One thing I agree with Mike here - Trump announcing to run is good news for Biden backers.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    EXCLUSIVE: Boris Johnson’s dramatic downfall to be the subject of new book by Nadine Dorries - working title “The Political Assassination of Boris Johnson” - exclusive by @DJBond6873
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/nadine-dorries-writing-book-boris-johnson-political-assassination-tory-conservative-mp-b1040256.html
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 3,982
    This is probably good news for the Democrats - providing that they put themselves in a position to win by having a viable candidate themselves for President. (Can that really be Biden now?)

    Either Trump gets the nomination, in which case the impact on the Republican vote can be anticipated to be much the same as the impact he had on Republican candidates he backed in the mid-terms, but this time with the added handicap of running in the face of opposition from the Murdoch empire.

    Or Trump is beaten to the nomination, in which case he goes off in a massive huff and flails out at the Republican Party in all directions, some MAGA supporters follow his lead and the impact on the Republican vote will be much the same as the impact his sulk in 2020 had on the Georgia Senate run-off, when some of his MAGA tribe took his cue and appeared to stay at home.


  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229

    Whey to go.

    Ghee, enough of the puns already.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    Sandpit said:

    kamski said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fishing said:

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    Incidentally, does anything Biden said discount it having been a missile fired from Belarussian territory?

    No, I don’t think so.
    But note the methodical, patient response, set against our panic about armegeddon last night.
    Shame that I missed that last night. Were a lot of people quoting things from Twitter.

    Many on PB can't make their minds up whether Twitter is doomed to a Friends Reunited extinction event, now that Musk has bought it, or remains the fount of all knowledge wherein every tweet is a hotline to the minds of presidents and prime ministers.

    And speaking of hotlines, Biden's categoric response to the Polish issue suggests strongly that the back channels between the US and Russia (which we learned of officially recently) are in fully functioning mode.
    Biden is having a good week. Coming over authoritative, calm and in command of the situation.

    He is going to run in 2024, no doubt in my mind.
    He will be 86 at the end of his second term. I can see that being an even bigger issue in 2024 than it is now.
    If he's up against Trump the age issue won't work.
    Reps slight favs for the 2024 presidency. I'd have it the other way round but even at odds against I'm not tempted two years out.
    It depends an awful lot on the candidates. Any Republican bar Trump should be favourite against Biden, but the incumbent likely beats the previous holder of the office. Of course, Biden could stand aside and there be a Dem primary season, which would likely be chaos as everyone tries to stop the very unpopular Harris.
    "Why Trump Is Favored To Win The 2024 Republican Presidential Primary"
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-2024-president/

    Seems to ignore the latest head-to-head Trump vs DeSantis polling - the 2 polls conducted since the midterms both have DeSantis ahead. The momentum now looks very much against Trump, once he looks more and more like a loser there's going to be more and more substantial figures saying "it's time to move on", and the Murdoch seems to be turning against him. The fact that he's unlikely to go without a (very ugly) fight is probably quite bad news for Republicans in 2024.

    Biden: of course his age should be an issue. He's going to be 80 next week.
    Was that polling among Americans in general, or among the Republican primary voters who will decide the nomination?

    Yes, the worry is that Trump will blow the whole thing up, even to the point of doing a Ross Perot and handing the Dems a massive majority.

    Biden’s age will definitely be an issue - he’s clearly getting old, and there’s a lot of videos of him having memory lapses and speaking incoherently.
    Here's the YouGov poll showing DeSantis 7 ahead of Trump head to head among Republicans and Republican-leaners:
    https://nypost.com/2022/11/12/new-primary-poll-finds-desantis-has-edge-over-trump-in-2024/
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,226
    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,519

    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Hilary? Michelle?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981

    Reliving my glorious betting strategy of early 2016 and I’ve got to say Trump is a lay.

    I reckon the January 6th coup d’état attempt was a Salisbury moment for Trump.

    In the UK it turned Corbyn from harmless old grandad into a malevolent force.

    Are there any really long odds potential candidates we ought to be considering ?
    At the moment it's all Trump/DeSantis, with Pence/Haley/Youngkin in the 20s - and pretty well everyone else in the hundreds.

    Someone has to be profitably mispriced ?
  • If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Hilary? Michelle?
    Both lays.
  • If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Hilary? Michelle?
    Both lays.
    But enough of your conquests, what do you think of their odds?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    edited November 16

    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Hilary? Michelle?
    Both lays.
    Expensive to do so, though, when they're in the 30s.
    Best just ignored.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,000
    I don't think Trump will be the GOP candidate. I think it will be Ron DeSantis. But I might be wrong DYOR
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,311

    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Could Barack Obama stand again?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981

    I don't think Trump will be the GOP candidate. I think it will be Ron DeSantis. But I might be wrong DYOR

    I think it might not be either.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981

    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Could Barack Obama stand again?
    No.
  • Nigelb said:

    Reliving my glorious betting strategy of early 2016 and I’ve got to say Trump is a lay.

    I reckon the January 6th coup d’état attempt was a Salisbury moment for Trump.

    In the UK it turned Corbyn from harmless old grandad into a malevolent force.

    Are there any really long odds potential candidates we ought to be considering ?
    At the moment it's all Trump/DeSantis, with Pence/Haley/Youngkin in the 20s - and pretty well everyone else in the hundreds.

    Someone has to be profitably mispriced ?
    I’m only silly odds on Mike Pompeo.

    Still available at 75/1.
  • Ok time for some trading bets on Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, and Marco Rubio at 570, 500, and 520 respectively.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981

    Nigelb said:

    Reliving my glorious betting strategy of early 2016 and I’ve got to say Trump is a lay.

    I reckon the January 6th coup d’état attempt was a Salisbury moment for Trump.

    In the UK it turned Corbyn from harmless old grandad into a malevolent force.

    Are there any really long odds potential candidates we ought to be considering ?
    At the moment it's all Trump/DeSantis, with Pence/Haley/Youngkin in the 20s - and pretty well everyone else in the hundreds.

    Someone has to be profitably mispriced ?
    I’m only silly odds on Mike Pompeo.

    Still available at 75/1.
    I laid Tucker-the-F*cker at 30; now somewhere around 160.
    The long odds candidates' odds can move sharply if they attract a bit of interest.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,411

    Trump is going to bang on for two years about how his mind is sharp as a tack - and Biden is completely ga-ga.

    And all those clips of Biden appearing, frankly, ga-ga are going to be played over and over and over for the next two years.

    Expect Trump to major on health records. "I have made mine public." The worry must be that the Democrats keep Biden in place and by the time it is too late to replace him, they have to keep him out the public eye because he is making too many gaffes for Republican attack ads. And "Where's Joe?" becomes the new "Where's Wally?"

    There needs to be an alternative Democrat candidate ready to go, just in case.

    Trump making his medical claims available, makes his refusal to make his tax returns even more suspect.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,408
    edited November 16

    If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Whitmer? National profile and strong anti-MAGA credentials.

    Newsom is a terrific fund-raiser but his strong Patrick Bateman energy might not play.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,450
    Undoubtedly he will have an impact on the Republican party nomination race and my guess is that the betting markets are right and this will be between him and the governor of Florida Ron DeS
    This is where I'd say the betting markets are wrong. Early favourites don't have a great record of making it to the nomination.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,470
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims

    Soon to 'stand down to spend more time clearing my name'?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,295
    eristdoof said:

    Trump is going to bang on for two years about how his mind is sharp as a tack - and Biden is completely ga-ga.

    And all those clips of Biden appearing, frankly, ga-ga are going to be played over and over and over for the next two years.

    Expect Trump to major on health records. "I have made mine public." The worry must be that the Democrats keep Biden in place and by the time it is too late to replace him, they have to keep him out the public eye because he is making too many gaffes for Republican attack ads. And "Where's Joe?" becomes the new "Where's Wally?"

    There needs to be an alternative Democrat candidate ready to go, just in case.

    Trump making his medical claims available, makes his refusal to make his tax returns even more suspect.
    Did you see Trump's cognitive test that he 'aced'?

    "Docs don't give a cognitive test to measure intellect," Dr Ankur Dave explained on Twitter. "We give it to assess cognitive defects. Trump calling questions on this test difficult should raise some red flags about dementia and inability to serve."
    https://www.iflscience.com/this-is-the-test-donald-trump-keeps-bragging-he-aced-56752
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,200
    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    Buy to let is already dead. And rising interest rates seem to make certain that there will be heavy falls in property prices in large parts of the country because of affordability issues.

    It isn't such good news for the large group of people who rely on private sector rental housing. More regulation on landlords who then exit the market, reduces the amount of properties available for rent, can only lead to increases in rents.

    If you look at the inquest yesterday about 'mould' in houses which caused the death of a 2 year old boy, you can predict exactly what is going to happen - landlords will be forced to retrofit houses and flats with mechanical ventilation at a cost of £2-£4k per unit that actually has a cooling effect that increases heating bills in winter. Post Grenfell, the government is basically addicted to new ways of regulating housing and has lost the ability to make effective policy in this area.

    In the end the only solution will be a massive programme of council house building at vast cost to the public sector. It will basically take us back to the 1970s and all the 'dependency' problems Thatcherism sought to solve.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,470
    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    I read in the last thread you placing the blame for the latest inflation rises on the BOE's timidity in raising interest rates. I am not opposing this argument, but I am interested - by what mechanism do you think lower than desired interest rates have raised petrol, energy and food costs? The pound is afaik, somewhat recovered, so it wouldn't be that - or would it?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,527

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims

    Soon to 'stand down to spend more time clearing my name'?
    Raab is the closest Sunak has to a best political buddy. He will not want to let him go.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,046
    >50% of Britons disapprove of Gov't on economy, NHS, immigration & housing.

    UK Gov't Policy Approval Ratings (13 November):

    Defence -2% (+1)
    Foreign Policy -12% (+1­)
    Housing -32% (–)
    Immigration -38% (+5)
    NHS -39% (-3)
    Economy -41% (-4)

    Changes +/- 6 November


    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1592842469774876673
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,470
    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims

    Soon to 'stand down to spend more time clearing my name'?
    Raab is the closest Sunak has to a best political buddy. He will not want to let him go.
    Oh well.
  • If not Biden for the Dems then who?

    Is there a current or ex Governor who could step up? What about a senator or a representative?

    It is not obvious.

    Hilary? Michelle?
    Both lays.
    But enough of your conquests, what do you think of their odds?
    You need to get your mind out of the gutter.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    edited November 16

    Undoubtedly he will have an impact on the Republican party nomination race and my guess is that the betting markets are right and this will be between him and the governor of Florida Ron DeS
    edmundintokyo:
    "This is where I'd say the betting markets are wrong. Early favourites don't have a great record of making it to the nomination."

    538 now hedging a bit and making a case for DeSantis:

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-desantis-is-a-major-threat-to-trumps-reelection/

    Trump does worse in head-to-head primary polls vs DeSantis, compared with polls with several candidates. (DeSantis also still has worse name recognition, so those head to head polls might be understating his potential lead). If the Republicans can coalesce around a single candidate against Trump this time, Trump's chances don't look too good.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,842
    @MikeSmithson
    "I think this makes it more likely that 80-year-old Biden will go for the Dem nomination"

    And win
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447
    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,842
    edited November 16
    Something wrong with the quoting from you there @edmundintokyo so my comment in response is:

    Well there are bound to be many other runners and all knocking spots off one another.

    There's only one winner from that process and he's not a Republican.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    edited November 16

    Ok time for some trading bets on Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, and Marco Rubio at 570, 500, and 520 respectively.

    Had a nibble of Larry Hogan.
    Will probably go nowhere, but if the Republicans decide they want a Mr Sensible, then he wouldn't be a bad pick.

    Not sure any of those three are value even at 500 - hasn't Cotton already said he won't run ? And little Marco can't fancy another pasting.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,222
    Scott_xP said:

    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520

    That's much faster than was indicated at the time. Interesting.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,100
    Steve Barclay is an interesting one. From the north of England, Sandhurst, Cambridge, worked in law and finance. Became an MP in 2010 and was a loyal backbencher but his career didn't really go anywhere until 2018. Very safe seat.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims

    Soon to 'stand down to spend more time clearing my name'?
    Raab is the closest Sunak has to a best political buddy. He will not want to let him go.
    How sad is that ?

    I thought he was friends with the Saj, anyway.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,200
    Sandpit said:

    darkage said:

    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    Buy to let is already dead. And rising interest rates seem to make certain that there will be heavy falls in property prices in large parts of the country because of affordability issues.

    It isn't such good news for the large group of people who rely on private sector rental housing. More regulation on landlords who then exit the market, reduces the amount of properties available for rent, can only lead to increases in rents.

    If you look at the inquest yesterday about 'mould' in houses which caused the death of a 2 year old boy, you can predict exactly what is going to happen - landlords will be forced to retrofit houses and flats with mechanical ventilation at a cost of £2-£4k per unit that actually has a cooling effect that increases heating bills in winter. Post Grenfell, the government is basically addicted to new ways of regulating housing and has lost the ability to make effective policy in this area.

    In the end the only solution will be a massive programme of council house building at vast cost to the public sector. It will basically take us back to the 1970s and all the 'dependency' problems Thatcherism sought to solve.
    Every solution to housing affordability involves building more houses. Millions more houses.

    The best thing government can do is get out of the way and make planning easier, especially for owner-builders and small developments. They could also create a standard for new types of housing, such as modular build, that will allow for regular mortgages to be taken out on them.
    Yeah there is much in this but the trouble is not to do with planning being in the way; it is because there isn't enough planning going on. No one wants to make decisions about planning to achieve large scale growth and it often get stuffed in to a fog of inpeneterable bureaucracy, much of it which has become parasitic and self serving.

    But if you dig in to this you will find the problem I keep mentioning, regulation and material costs have driven up build costs to the point where you just cannot viably build anything. This is before you even deal with planning risk. Investors are sitting on big assets in valuable, well connected areas (ie large supermarkets) which could be rebuilt with hundreds of flats on the same site whilst keeping the supermarket, and concluding that it isn't viable to do it because of build costs, falling house prices and political opposition largely from wealthy pensioners who just dont like change.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,100
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520

    That's much faster than was indicated at the time. Interesting.
    I struggle to understand the fuss really. If they want to hold an advisory referendum what is the legal case for stopping it? If westminster wants to strike it down?
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447
    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
    It's electoral college style, so each state is worth a different amount, but under GOP system every state is winner takes all delegates. It's one of the reasons Trump did so well in 2016 - the GOP didn't coalesce around a second candidate, so he managed to win lots of states with essentially a third - 40% of the vote. This time he is the ex president and lots of the GOP base still like him, but it is hard to imagine him getting a majority in every state. The bigger the field, the more likely he is to win, but also if it's just him v DeSantis and DeSantis wins, I can see a scenario where Trump spends a lot of time campaigning for GOP base to abstain / write him in (he would unlikely run third party as I know some state have sore-loser rules re losing primaries and then running again)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    edited November 16
    kamski said:



    ...Trump does worse in head-to-head primary polls vs DeSantis, compared with polls with several candidates. (DeSantis also still has worse name recognition, so those head to head polls might be understating his potential lead)...

    That's to assume to know him is to like him.
    Not sure that holds outside of Florida.
  • lol

    Raab doing PMQs today.

    Top bantz.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,125
    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    darkage said:

    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    Buy to let is already dead. And rising interest rates seem to make certain that there will be heavy falls in property prices in large parts of the country because of affordability issues.

    It isn't such good news for the large group of people who rely on private sector rental housing. More regulation on landlords who then exit the market, reduces the amount of properties available for rent, can only lead to increases in rents.

    If you look at the inquest yesterday about 'mould' in houses which caused the death of a 2 year old boy, you can predict exactly what is going to happen - landlords will be forced to retrofit houses and flats with mechanical ventilation at a cost of £2-£4k per unit that actually has a cooling effect that increases heating bills in winter. Post Grenfell, the government is basically addicted to new ways of regulating housing and has lost the ability to make effective policy in this area.

    In the end the only solution will be a massive programme of council house building at vast cost to the public sector. It will basically take us back to the 1970s and all the 'dependency' problems Thatcherism sought to solve.
    Every solution to housing affordability involves building more houses. Millions more houses.

    The best thing government can do is get out of the way and make planning easier, especially for owner-builders and small developments. They could also create a standard for new types of housing, such as modular build, that will allow for regular mortgages to be taken out on them.
    Yeah there is much in this but the trouble is not to do with planning being in the way; it is because there isn't enough planning going on. No one wants to make decisions about planning to achieve large scale growth and it often get stuffed in to a fog of inpeneterable bureaucracy, much of it which has become parasitic and self serving.

    But if you dig in to this you will find the problem I keep mentioning, regulation and material costs have driven up build costs to the point where you just cannot viably build anything. This is before you even deal with planning risk. Investors are sitting on big assets in valuable, well connected areas (ie large supermarkets) which could be rebuilt with hundreds of flats on the same site whilst keeping the supermarket, and concluding that it isn't viable to do it because of build costs, falling house prices and political opposition largely from wealthy pensioners who just dont like change.
    We could at least do something about the political opposition.

    Another thing we could do to increase housing capacity is to let people build up. All those terraced streets in London & elsewhere could easily gain a storey without materially affecting the streetscape. An instant increase in housing capacity right there, paid for by individual homeowners as & when they choose to build up.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920
    Nigelb said:

    Ok time for some trading bets on Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, and Marco Rubio at 570, 500, and 520 respectively.

    Had a nibble of Larry Hogan.
    Will probably go nowhere, but if the Republicans decide they want a Mr Sensible, then he wouldn't be a bad pick.

    Not sure any of those three are value even at 500 - hasn't Cotton already said he won't run ? And little Marco can't fancy another pasting.
    "if the Republicans decide they want a Mr Sensible"

    lolz
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
    It's electoral college style, so each state is worth a different amount, but under GOP system every state is winner takes all delegates. It's one of the reasons Trump did so well in 2016 - the GOP didn't coalesce around a second candidate, so he managed to win lots of states with essentially a third - 40% of the vote. This time he is the ex president and lots of the GOP base still like him, but it is hard to imagine him getting a majority in every state. The bigger the field, the more likely he is to win, but also if it's just him v DeSantis and DeSantis wins, I can see a scenario where Trump spends a lot of time campaigning for GOP base to abstain / write him in (he would unlikely run third party as I know some state have sore-loser rules re losing primaries and then running again)
    Is every state winner takes all? Hasn't been in previous elections
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447
    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
    It's electoral college style, so each state is worth a different amount, but under GOP system every state is winner takes all delegates. It's one of the reasons Trump did so well in 2016 - the GOP didn't coalesce around a second candidate, so he managed to win lots of states with essentially a third - 40% of the vote. This time he is the ex president and lots of the GOP base still like him, but it is hard to imagine him getting a majority in every state. The bigger the field, the more likely he is to win, but also if it's just him v DeSantis and DeSantis wins, I can see a scenario where Trump spends a lot of time campaigning for GOP base to abstain / write him in (he would unlikely run third party as I know some state have sore-loser rules re losing primaries and then running again)
    Is every state winner takes all? Hasn't been in previous elections
    For the GOP primary, it has. Dem primary is proportional.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,450
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,200
    Phil said:

    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    darkage said:

    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    Buy to let is already dead. And rising interest rates seem to make certain that there will be heavy falls in property prices in large parts of the country because of affordability issues.

    It isn't such good news for the large group of people who rely on private sector rental housing. More regulation on landlords who then exit the market, reduces the amount of properties available for rent, can only lead to increases in rents.

    If you look at the inquest yesterday about 'mould' in houses which caused the death of a 2 year old boy, you can predict exactly what is going to happen - landlords will be forced to retrofit houses and flats with mechanical ventilation at a cost of £2-£4k per unit that actually has a cooling effect that increases heating bills in winter. Post Grenfell, the government is basically addicted to new ways of regulating housing and has lost the ability to make effective policy in this area.

    In the end the only solution will be a massive programme of council house building at vast cost to the public sector. It will basically take us back to the 1970s and all the 'dependency' problems Thatcherism sought to solve.
    Every solution to housing affordability involves building more houses. Millions more houses.

    The best thing government can do is get out of the way and make planning easier, especially for owner-builders and small developments. They could also create a standard for new types of housing, such as modular build, that will allow for regular mortgages to be taken out on them.
    Yeah there is much in this but the trouble is not to do with planning being in the way; it is because there isn't enough planning going on. No one wants to make decisions about planning to achieve large scale growth and it often get stuffed in to a fog of inpeneterable bureaucracy, much of it which has become parasitic and self serving.

    But if you dig in to this you will find the problem I keep mentioning, regulation and material costs have driven up build costs to the point where you just cannot viably build anything. This is before you even deal with planning risk. Investors are sitting on big assets in valuable, well connected areas (ie large supermarkets) which could be rebuilt with hundreds of flats on the same site whilst keeping the supermarket, and concluding that it isn't viable to do it because of build costs, falling house prices and political opposition largely from wealthy pensioners who just dont like change.
    We could at least do something about the political opposition.

    Another thing we could do to increase housing capacity is to let people build up. All those terraced streets in London & elsewhere could easily gain a storey without materially affecting the streetscape. An instant increase in housing capacity right there, paid for by individual homeowners as & when they choose to build up.
    All these things have been thought of and tried over the past decade, the government have even introduced laws that allow this to happen but the decision maker still needs to consider 'appearance' and more often than not the inescapable conclusion is that the additional storey will materially harm the appearance of the road.

    Dominic Cummings is very proud of the fact he managed to force through a bunch of changes to planning 'under the radar' that allow shops and other community functions to be converted to housing without planning permission but it is really bad legislation based on largely on gut instinct and ignorance; normally it takes about 8 years for this type of bad change to be corrected.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,272

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Rishi Sunak has written to Dominic Raab to confirm there will be an independent investigation into the two formal complaints against the deputy prime minister. https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1592831453901250596/photo/1

    “He’s fucked,” a former cabinet minister told @PoliticsHome.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/dominic-raab-asks-rishi-sunak-to-launch-independent-investigation-following-conduct-claims

    Soon to 'stand down to spend more time clearing my name'?
    He'll be eating roo perineum by the end of 2023.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,160

    I don't think Trump will be the GOP candidate. I think it will be Ron DeSantis. But I might be wrong DYOR

    Agree with this. I also don't think Big Joe will be the DEM candidate. I feel someone might emerge beyond the obvious candidates: Fetterman or Whitmer perhaps?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,000

    I don't think Trump will be the GOP candidate. I think it will be Ron DeSantis. But I might be wrong DYOR

    Agree with this. I also don't think Big Joe will be the DEM candidate. I feel someone might emerge beyond the obvious candidates: Fetterman or Whitmer perhaps?
    Yes this is reasonable.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    edited November 16
    Scott_xP said:

    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520

    A win for the SNP whatever the outcome sadly.

    In a non lawyer's reading of the arguments it did seem pretty straightforward that it was for the Lord Advocate to state if they believed the parliament had power to legislate on the question, and not to refer it to court in advance. If they couldn't say in their view the power was there, end of for their part at least.

    Can't imagine questions of technical legal procedure cutting much ice though.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 404
    The Russian defence ministry says all the missiles that hit Kiev yesterday were launched by Ukrainian air defence too.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,624
    Ron versus Moron

  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    Nigelb said:

    kamski said:



    ...Trump does worse in head-to-head primary polls vs DeSantis, compared with polls with several candidates. (DeSantis also still has worse name recognition, so those head to head polls might be understating his potential lead)...

    That's to assume to know him is to like him.
    Not sure that holds outside of Florida.
    Possibly. Although he beats Trump by 26% in Florida in the latest (post-midterm) poll, which is quite a lot among Republicans who do know him. The previous poll from the same pollster conducted in August had DeSantis only 7% ahead.

    The other thing which could work against Trump is that primary voters tend to prefer candidates they think will win in the general. If Republican voters start thinking Trump is less likely than eg DeSantis to win the presidency, then Trump could rapidly lose a lot of support.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,859
    DJ41 said:

    The Russian defence ministry says all the missiles that hit Kiev yesterday were launched by Ukrainian air defence too.

    Is that a Russian way of saying, that all the Russian missiles aimed at Kiev were shot down?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520

    That's much faster than was indicated at the time. Interesting.
    I struggle to understand the fuss really. If they want to hold an advisory referendum what is the legal case for stopping it? If westminster wants to strike it down?
    Whilst I think the Scottish parliament should have a referendum if they want one, which they do, the fuss is pretty clear when it's a question of whether legally they hold the power to hold even an advisory one.

    Whether that is sound tactics is another matter.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,467
    Raab just crushed Mrs Shouty.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,624
    Phil said:

    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    darkage said:

    MaxPB said:

    Also interesting and probably good news, house price inflation fell from 13% to 9% YoY, I think for the first time in years houses now have negative real return on capital. If the government manages to put up costs for landlords a bit further we could see a glut of existing property put up for sale by them.

    Buy to let is already dead. And rising interest rates seem to make certain that there will be heavy falls in property prices in large parts of the country because of affordability issues.

    It isn't such good news for the large group of people who rely on private sector rental housing. More regulation on landlords who then exit the market, reduces the amount of properties available for rent, can only lead to increases in rents.

    If you look at the inquest yesterday about 'mould' in houses which caused the death of a 2 year old boy, you can predict exactly what is going to happen - landlords will be forced to retrofit houses and flats with mechanical ventilation at a cost of £2-£4k per unit that actually has a cooling effect that increases heating bills in winter. Post Grenfell, the government is basically addicted to new ways of regulating housing and has lost the ability to make effective policy in this area.

    In the end the only solution will be a massive programme of council house building at vast cost to the public sector. It will basically take us back to the 1970s and all the 'dependency' problems Thatcherism sought to solve.
    Every solution to housing affordability involves building more houses. Millions more houses.

    The best thing government can do is get out of the way and make planning easier, especially for owner-builders and small developments. They could also create a standard for new types of housing, such as modular build, that will allow for regular mortgages to be taken out on them.
    Yeah there is much in this but the trouble is not to do with planning being in the way; it is because there isn't enough planning going on. No one wants to make decisions about planning to achieve large scale growth and it often get stuffed in to a fog of inpeneterable bureaucracy, much of it which has become parasitic and self serving.

    But if you dig in to this you will find the problem I keep mentioning, regulation and material costs have driven up build costs to the point where you just cannot viably build anything. This is before you even deal with planning risk. Investors are sitting on big assets in valuable, well connected areas (ie large supermarkets) which could be rebuilt with hundreds of flats on the same site whilst keeping the supermarket, and concluding that it isn't viable to do it because of build costs, falling house prices and political opposition largely from wealthy pensioners who just dont like change.
    We could at least do something about the political opposition.

    Another thing we could do to increase housing capacity is to let people build up. All those terraced streets in London & elsewhere could easily gain a storey without materially affecting the streetscape. An instant increase in housing capacity right there, paid for by individual homeowners as & when they choose to build up.
    There's nothing uglier than a street lined with a load of mismatched loft conversions. Near us there is a street of bungalows, the majority of which now have a random selection of dormers, the majority of which look like someone has just dropped a shed on the roof. A right bloody mess.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,838
    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
    It's electoral college style, so each state is worth a different amount, but under GOP system every state is winner takes all delegates. It's one of the reasons Trump did so well in 2016 - the GOP didn't coalesce around a second candidate, so he managed to win lots of states with essentially a third - 40% of the vote. This time he is the ex president and lots of the GOP base still like him, but it is hard to imagine him getting a majority in every state. The bigger the field, the more likely he is to win, but also if it's just him v DeSantis and DeSantis wins, I can see a scenario where Trump spends a lot of time campaigning for GOP base to abstain / write him in (he would unlikely run third party as I know some state have sore-loser rules re losing primaries and then running again)
    Is every state winner takes all? Hasn't been in previous elections
    For the GOP primary, it has. Dem primary is proportional.
    https://ballotpedia.org/Republican_delegate_rules,_2020
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,450
    Heathener said:

    Something wrong with the quoting from you there @edmundintokyo so my comment in response is:

    Well there are bound to be many other runners and all knocking spots off one another.

    There's only one winner from that process and he's not a Republican.

    IDK, quite a few election winners come out from pretty brutal primaries. Obama did, Bill Clinton did. Arguably the Dems would have had a more successful 2016 if they'd had a chaotic slap-fest with more candidates, one of whom might have had the chance to dispose of Hillary Clinton.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    kamski said:

    Nigelb said:

    kamski said:



    ...Trump does worse in head-to-head primary polls vs DeSantis, compared with polls with several candidates. (DeSantis also still has worse name recognition, so those head to head polls might be understating his potential lead)...

    That's to assume to know him is to like him.
    Not sure that holds outside of Florida.
    Possibly. Although he beats Trump by 26% in Florida in the latest (post-midterm) poll, which is quite a lot among Republicans who do know him. The previous poll from the same pollster conducted in August had DeSantis only 7% ahead.

    The other thing which could work against Trump is that primary voters tend to prefer candidates they think will win in the general. If Republican voters start thinking Trump is less likely than eg DeSantis to win the presidency, then Trump could rapidly lose a lot of support.
    Anything's possible with a Republican party in the state it is.
    Which is where I started out looking for unlikely long odds names.

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Take your pick

    Raab dealt with that comfortably. Though to be fair, Angela Rayner made it very easy for him.
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1592853158216495110

    Easy win for Angela Rayner, there.
    https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1592853116193763328
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,222
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The @UKSupremeCourt will rule next Wednesday, 23 November, on the questions raised by the lord advocate about holding a referendum on Scottish independence.
    https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1592839626015723520

    A win for the SNP whatever the outcome sadly.

    In a non lawyer's reading of the arguments it did seem pretty straightforward that it was for the Lord Advocate to state if they believed the parliament had power to legislate on the question, and not to refer it to court in advance. If they couldn't say in their view the power was there, end of for their part at least.

    Can't imagine questions of technical legal procedure cutting much ice though.
    I would be extremely surprised and disappointed if the SC ducked the question in this way. The central question is can the Scottish Parliament legislate for a referendum on Independence without the consent of the UK Parliament. Even if they find this reference premature I think that they will answer that question.
  • Raab just crushed Mrs Shouty.

    The issue that concerns me is that it seems that the innocent until proved guilty has changed to guilty until proved innocent
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 404
    edited November 16
    Sandpit said:

    DJ41 said:

    The Russian defence ministry says all the missiles that hit Kiev yesterday were launched by Ukrainian air defence too.

    Is that a Russian way of saying, that all the Russian missiles aimed at Kiev were shot down?
    It could well be, yes.

    https://tass.com/defense/1537641

    "not a single missile strike was delivered against sites in the city of Kiev."

    But they are saying they didn't target residential areas.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447

    I don't think Trump will be the GOP candidate. I think it will be Ron DeSantis. But I might be wrong DYOR

    Agree with this. I also don't think Big Joe will be the DEM candidate. I feel someone might emerge beyond the obvious candidates: Fetterman or Whitmer perhaps?
    If Joe runs, I think it's likely he wins, just because he is POTUS and the nominal head of the party - he will have the entire structure of the party behind him plus people like Obama etc. If he decides not to run / becomes unable to run, that's a different story. I don't know who the favourite is, but Gavin Newsom is clearly running (Cali Gov) and I wouldn't be surprised if Bernie ran again (he's old too, but he is more "with it" than Biden). I could see Buttigieg going for it and having a lot of support from the mainstream wing, but he doesn't do well enough with African Americans to get the nominee. Kamala Harris is just bad at her job. Fetterman is a junior senator who just had a stroke and just won his own seat - and did so based on a relatively local (yinzer) identity that wouldn't quite fit nationally. Whitmer could be good, she's done in Michigan what DeSantis has done in Florida. AOC would turn 35 in Oct of 2024, so she could assume office by the Jan, but I'm not sure what the rules are for running whilst under 35.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,467
    Scott_xP said:

    Take your pick

    Raab dealt with that comfortably. Though to be fair, Angela Rayner made it very easy for him.
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1592853158216495110

    Easy win for Angela Rayner, there.
    https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1592853116193763328

    OMG, I agree with Dan the Man!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    I'm reliably informed there were well over 10 witnesses to the tomato hurling
    https://twitter.com/hoffman_noa/status/1592853557581340673
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    kamski said:

    Nigelb said:

    kamski said:



    ...Trump does worse in head-to-head primary polls vs DeSantis, compared with polls with several candidates. (DeSantis also still has worse name recognition, so those head to head polls might be understating his potential lead)...

    That's to assume to know him is to like him.
    Not sure that holds outside of Florida.
    Possibly. Although he beats Trump by 26% in Florida in the latest (post-midterm) poll, which is quite a lot among Republicans who do know him. The previous poll from the same pollster conducted in August had DeSantis only 7% ahead.

    The other thing which could work against Trump is that primary voters tend to prefer candidates they think will win in the general. If Republican voters start thinking Trump is less likely than eg DeSantis to win the presidency, then Trump could rapidly lose a lot of support.
    That's the hope.

    Some clearly already think he is not a winner, but its mostly those who already disliked him.

    Who can persuade the rank and file that he is not a winner?

    Hence the need for a popular new candidate. They need not attack him too much, but just hammer home that they are a winner, and watch Trump explode.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,222
    DJ41 said:

    The Russian defence ministry says all the missiles that hit Kiev yesterday were launched by Ukrainian air defence too.

    What, they are saying none of their 90 odd missiles got through?

    I am not sure that they have thought this through.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447
    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    kamski said:

    148grss said:

    A reminder re GOP primary rules: it's state by state FPTP not the state by state PR used by the Dems. This could mean a very bloody primary race as Trump is still the favourite of 30-40% of the GOP base. I can imagine a scenario where you get the equivalent of an electoral college tie but in the GOP primary - I think some of the big states (Florida, Cali, Texas) would go DeSantis, but Trump would probably secure the GOP midwest, AZ, NYS etc. It could be a very prolonged and very ugly fight. And I think in the end Trump will win because he is the only candidate willing to take his ball away and refuse to play, potentially taking a third of the GOPs base with him. Every other candidate cares about the party; DeSantis is not as much of an insider as he seems now he is popular, but he is willing to fight for the party beyond his ego. Trump, not so much.

    Varies state by state doesn't it?
    It's electoral college style, so each state is worth a different amount, but under GOP system every state is winner takes all delegates. It's one of the reasons Trump did so well in 2016 - the GOP didn't coalesce around a second candidate, so he managed to win lots of states with essentially a third - 40% of the vote. This time he is the ex president and lots of the GOP base still like him, but it is hard to imagine him getting a majority in every state. The bigger the field, the more likely he is to win, but also if it's just him v DeSantis and DeSantis wins, I can see a scenario where Trump spends a lot of time campaigning for GOP base to abstain / write him in (he would unlikely run third party as I know some state have sore-loser rules re losing primaries and then running again)
    Is every state winner takes all? Hasn't been in previous elections
    For the GOP primary, it has. Dem primary is proportional.
    https://ballotpedia.org/Republican_delegate_rules,_2020
    Huh, apologies, I misunderstood. They have more state winner take all states, but not all. Well, it still makes it easier for plurality holders in a large field.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    Scott_xP said:

    I'm reliably informed there were well over 10 witnesses to the tomato hurling
    https://twitter.com/hoffman_noa/status/1592853557581340673

    Thoughts and prayers with all victims of salad tossing on this dark day.
  • Raab just crushed Mrs Shouty.

    The issue that concerns me is that it seems that the innocent until proved guilty has changed to guilty until proved innocent
    Like you gave Starmer over currygate?
    I refute that completely

    I never said he was guilty but that the incident should be investigated

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,467

    Raab just crushed Mrs Shouty.

    The issue that concerns me is that it seems that the innocent until proved guilty has changed to guilty until proved innocent
    It certainly isn't the slam-dunk, guilty-as-charged, that we all called on PB over currygate.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,100
    DJ41 said:

    The Russian defence ministry says all the missiles that hit Kiev yesterday were launched by Ukrainian air defence too.

    They really do focus on the 'your uncle in Nigeria' element of the population.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    edited November 16

    Raab just crushed Mrs Shouty.

    The issue that concerns me is that it seems that the innocent until proved guilty has changed to guilty until proved innocent
    Well, it's not a court of law, and we have become used to discovering our political leaders often display childish behaviours and petty bullying which they defend as being tough.

    It may well be Raab is not a nice man, but that's not fatal to him. So far that seems the main thrust of allegations.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,194
    Scott_xP said:

    I'm reliably informed there were well over 10 witnesses to the tomato hurling
    https://twitter.com/hoffman_noa/status/1592853557581340673

    I hope counselling is available to help them with this traumatic incident.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,467
    Edward Leigh wants identity cards. Incoming vanity by election for Haltemprice and Howden.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    ...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Scoop: Stephen Schwarzman comes out against Trump in major signal to GOP donors.. w @mikeallen https://www.axios.com/2022/11/16/trump-stephen-schwarzman-2024-presidential-race
Sign In or Register to comment.