Howdy, Stranger!

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

Why Trump not winning WH2024 could be a value bet – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited November 2023 in General
imageWhy Trump not winning WH2024 could be a value bet – politicalbetting.com

Currently Donald Trump is the betting favorite to be the winner of the 2024 presidential election. He is marginally ahead in the betting of the incumbent Joe Biden

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    Is it really hard to judge whether the Supreme Court will bar Trump from standing on the ground on insurrection?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    2nd like Trump?
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,335
    3rd like the LibDems now that the SNP are collapsing.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    Chris said:

    Is it really hard to judge whether the Supreme Court will bar Trump from standing on the ground on insurrection?

    Well, I doubt they'll hang him, so he'll probably get to stand on the ground.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Surely the SC will vote in favour of the tangerine tyrant?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475
    Ghedebrav said:

    Surely the SC will vote in favour of the tangerine tyrant?

    If Trump is found guilty of insurrection by the Georgia or federal case, possibly with jail time, then it would be in the Republicans' interest if he's disqualified and they can stand Haley or someone instead. The SC will then do what is in the Republicans' interest!
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866
    Chris said:

    Is it really hard to judge whether the Supreme Court will bar Trump from standing on the ground on insurrection?

    Yes. The sensible answers are: Obviously yes; and Obviously no. Not certain which.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661
    Good call, Mike. There aren't many better sells than Donald Trump for the WH at 2.8. If only I wasn't so short of him already I'd be doing loads of that.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,812
    I like Joe Biden. He's been a good president and I consider the concerns over his age overstated.

    But it's clear that a lot of Americans are not happy with their lot and are going to
    vote change. Trump represents change of a sort despite being a former president. And he has Bidens record to play with. "Are you feeling better off then you did four years ago?" Not easy to answer, that one.

    So, however reluctantly, the Dems need a Plan B. A new candidate who can represent change while wiring into
    Trump's record. The debate really ought to be about who that person could be. I really hope serious discussions are going on behind the scenes.

    Ideally Biden should be re-elected. But the stakes are too high. Trump is an existential threat.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475

    I like Joe Biden. He's been a good president and I consider the concerns over his age overstated.

    But it's clear that a lot of Americans are not happy with their lot and are going to
    vote change. Trump represents change of a sort despite being a former president. And he has Bidens record to play with. "Are you feeling better off then you did four years ago?" Not easy to answer, that one.

    So, however reluctantly, the Dems need a Plan B. A new candidate who can represent change while wiring into
    Trump's record. The debate really ought to be about who that person could be. I really hope serious discussions are going on behind the scenes.

    Ideally Biden should be re-elected. But the stakes are too high. Trump is an existential threat.

    But Biden has a track record of beating Trump, which no-one else has. Trump is an existential threat, so maybe the last thing the Dems can afford is to have a bruising primary.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edited November 2023
    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    On the Colorado Question - it'll be ruled against Trump by the District judge, the appeal will be upheld by the State Supreme Court and SCOTUS will overrule the State Supreme Court 6-3. Bookmark it.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475
    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    DeSantis's time has passed. Trump fans hate him. No-one else likes him.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    On topic, a good piece from Politico (linked here the other day) about the changing makeup of the electorate in the US.
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/04/new-republican-party-working-class-coalition-00122822

    TL:DR there’s a lot of young working-class people, even young black people, who are turning Rebublican, while those with advanced degrees are moving towards the Democrats. Social factors are now as big as economic factors in voting intention, but there are many Americans who are definitely worse off than four years ago.

    I think that Trump’s ‘troubles’ help him in the primary, but might work against him in the general election, I really can’t imagine the SC agreeing to keep him off the ballot anywhere, without a conviction not subject to further appeal at the time of the election. There’s considerable media bias against him, which clouds a lot of what we read, and he remains more popular than most of us might think, as is showing up in polling.

    An anti-Trump PAC made four attack ads about his legal troubles, but didn’t run them after they backfired with test audiences. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/03/anti-trump-group-ads-backfired-00125087

    The whole thing would be so much easier if both parties agreed to a maximum age of 75, and two old men could retire somewhat gracefully to enable a full primary season.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,812

    I like Joe Biden. He's been a good president and I consider the concerns over his age overstated.

    But it's clear that a lot of Americans are not happy with their lot and are going to
    vote change. Trump represents change of a sort despite being a former president. And he has Bidens record to play with. "Are you feeling better off then you did four years ago?" Not easy to answer, that one.

    So, however reluctantly, the Dems need a Plan B. A new candidate who can represent change while wiring into
    Trump's record. The debate really ought to be about who that person could be. I really hope serious discussions are going on behind the scenes.

    Ideally Biden should be re-elected. But the stakes are too high. Trump is an existential threat.

    But Biden has a track record of beating Trump, which no-one else has. Trump is an existential threat, so maybe the last thing the Dems can afford is to have a bruising primary.
    Very valid points. If they replace Biden it will need to be a coronation. Someone who will be one-term president. But who?
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    Agree, though Ramaswamy is a bit of a wildcard in there.

    Dunno where RFKjr fits in either - I would guess he'd take a fair chunk of Trump votes if orange gob doesn't run.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,950
    What's the controversy in the Sri Lanka / Bangladesh match? I've been incommunicado for a few hours.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    Good post. There are so many random elements to this race that there are many plausible scenarios (and why I'm not betting at all, though selling Trump does indeed seem a valid call).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    Andy_JS said:

    What's the controversy in the Sri Lanka / Bangladesh match? I've been incommunicado for a few hours.

    First ODI player given ‘timed out’, for not being ready at the crease on time following the previous wicket. He had an issue with the strap on his helmet.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475

    I like Joe Biden. He's been a good president and I consider the concerns over his age overstated.

    But it's clear that a lot of Americans are not happy with their lot and are going to
    vote change. Trump represents change of a sort despite being a former president. And he has Bidens record to play with. "Are you feeling better off then you did four years ago?" Not easy to answer, that one.

    So, however reluctantly, the Dems need a Plan B. A new candidate who can represent change while wiring into
    Trump's record. The debate really ought to be about who that person could be. I really hope serious discussions are going on behind the scenes.

    Ideally Biden should be re-elected. But the stakes are too high. Trump is an existential threat.

    But Biden has a track record of beating Trump, which no-one else has. Trump is an existential threat, so maybe the last thing the Dems can afford is to have a bruising primary.
    Very valid points. If they replace Biden it will need to be a coronation. Someone who will be one-term president. But who?
    Coronations are a beloved idea of political pundits, but they don't happen very often. If Biden fell ill much closer to the election, maybe a coronation would be possible, but not now.
  • I like Joe Biden. He's been a good president and I consider the concerns over his age overstated.

    But it's clear that a lot of Americans are not happy with their lot and are going to
    vote change. Trump represents change of a sort despite being a former president. And he has Bidens record to play with. "Are you feeling better off then you did four years ago?" Not easy to answer, that one.

    So, however reluctantly, the Dems need a Plan B. A new candidate who can represent change while wiring into
    Trump's record. The debate really ought to be about who that person could be. I really hope serious discussions are going on behind the scenes.

    Ideally Biden should be re-elected. But the stakes are too high. Trump is an existential threat.

    But Biden has a track record of beating Trump, which no-one else has. Trump is an existential threat, so maybe the last thing the Dems can afford is to have a bruising primary.
    Hillary beat him in 2016. Um, in the popular vote!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,950
    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What's the controversy in the Sri Lanka / Bangladesh match? I've been incommunicado for a few hours.

    First ODI player given ‘timed out’, for not being ready at the crease on time following the previous wicket. He had an issue with the strap on his helmet.
    Thanks.
  • rcs1000 said:

    A much bigger risk for Trump is Georgia. His lawyers have now all flipped, and they testimony and electronic evidence could be very damning.

    I agree. Georgia poses a far greater threat to any election hopes than any of his other legal issues.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155
    "Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."

    I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.

    I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.

    I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.

    What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475

    rcs1000 said:

    A much bigger risk for Trump is Georgia. His lawyers have now all flipped, and they testimony and electronic evidence could be very damning.

    I agree. Georgia poses a far greater threat to any election hopes than any of his other legal issues.
    If he loses in Georgia, presumably he also loses the federal case covering the same territory.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    On the Colorado Question - it'll be ruled against Trump by the District judge, the appeal will be upheld by the State Supreme Court and SCOTUS will overrule the State Supreme Court 6-3. Bookmark it.

    I think it's more likely Trump is ditched than barred (assuming he's found guilty, or appears about to be so, in one or more of the ongoing cases).
    In that event, Haley is more likely than DeSantis, IMO.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    I think any situation where Trump wins the primary and isn't the nominee leads to a significant amount of the GOP base sitting out the election.

    I think the Democratic base would be more willing to accept a convention stitch up, especially if Biden dropped out due to "health reasons" after essentially winning the primary. I do not see the convention anointing Harris - my money would be on Newsom or Whitmer (although there are enough stupid people in the DNC that Clinton will be discussed with some level of seriousness, despite that being a godawful idea).
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,360
    Doubt supreme court (remember Trump got 3/9 on there) is going to rule Trump ineligible. I think he'll win the R nomination too.

    So laying him is tying up money for a while I think, his odds are more likely to come in than go out.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    I'm on (for the GOP nomination) at an average of 20/1, along with a smaller bet on the presidency at 30/1.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,683
    Andy_JS said:

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What's the controversy in the Sri Lanka / Bangladesh match? I've been incommunicado for a few hours.

    First ODI player given ‘timed out’, for not being ready at the crease on time following the previous wicket. He had an issue with the strap on his helmet.
    Thanks.
    Very poor from Bangladesh and the umpires. Safety should be the number one rule - he arrived at the crease and then realised there was an issue. He should have been allowed to correct that.

    Cricket has standards and this year has seen two incidents that leave an unpleasant taste in the mouth.

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,950
    No handshakes between the teams.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    Ghedebrav said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    Agree, though Ramaswamy is a bit of a wildcard in there.

    Dunno where RFKjr fits in either - I would guess he'd take a fair chunk of Trump votes if orange gob doesn't run.
    The former is probably done (though still throwing the odd $10M or so of his own cash towards the cause).

    RFK could be awkward for everyone, though his right wing backers could easily bail on him anytime. He should enjoy the grift while it lasts.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,950
    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    On the Colorado Question - it'll be ruled against Trump by the District judge, the appeal will be upheld by the State Supreme Court and SCOTUS will overrule the State Supreme Court 6-3. Bookmark it.

    I assume it would also give a major boost to Kennedy's campaign.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    edited November 2023
    4/ Donald Trump has been on the witness stand for only a short amount of time this morning, and he already appears to be lying*. More below...
    https://twitter.com/DanAlexander21/status/1721554757817434372

    *I presume he opened his mouth.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155

    rcs1000 said:

    A much bigger risk for Trump is Georgia. His lawyers have now all flipped, and they testimony and electronic evidence could be very damning.

    I agree. Georgia poses a far greater threat to any election hopes than any of his other legal issues.
    Again, I think there is a high chance that SCOTUS will rule that the bar for 14th amendment applies "when someone who has taken an oath of office to obey the Constitution participates in an insurrection" is something that can only be determined via impeachment in Congress and not via the courts. I don't think it has ever been tested, so they can basically make up whatever they want, and I think that is the thing most likely to stick (and will likely be the Trump team talking points "they tried to impeach me, very unfairly, and failed - now they want the courts to do it for them. Very nasty, very bad. But we have 5 judges, 5 good judges, that Roberts is basically a liberal now, who did the right thing, the right thing, on Roe v Wade - which I really made happen because I put 3 of them on there, not many people know that - and will do the right thing now. And the Democrats, the Democ-rats, have been trying to get Thomas out because they know how good a judge he is; and that shows that they are the real racists, really, when you think about it...")
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475
    rkrkrk said:

    Doubt supreme court (remember Trump got 3/9 on there) is going to rule Trump ineligible. I think he'll win the R nomination too.

    So laying him is tying up money for a while I think, his odds are more likely to come in than go out.

    I don't think the SC justices appointed by Trump feel any particularly loyalty to him. They will, however, support the Republican agenda. If the Republican agenda says to kick Trump to the curb, they'll kick him to the curb.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,038
    edited November 2023
    I'll go a little further than others. If Haley wins the nomination, I think she might pick Asa Hutchinson as VP.

    This accomplishment, which I have mentioned before, from his early career, impresses me:
    "In 1982, President Ronald Reagan appointed Hutchinson U.S. attorney for the Western District of Arkansas. At age 31, Hutchinson was the nation's youngest U.S. attorney. He made national headlines after successfully prosecuting The Covenant, The Sword, and The Arm of the Lord (CSA), a white supremacist organization founded by polygamist James Ellison. The CSA forced a three-day armed standoff with local, state, and federal law enforcement. As U.S. attorney, Hutchinson personally negotiated a peaceful conclusion to the standoff."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asa_Hutchinson

    And the rest of his long career includes some of the kinds of experience most needed, now.

    (For the record: I don't think either Trump or Biden will withdraw, Trump because running gives him his best chance to stay out of jail, Biden because he believes he is the best person for the job.)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125

    Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?

    I am reminded of the story that Caesar was so in debt, on the eve of the election for Pontifex Maximus, that he told his mother that either he would be Pontifex Max. when she saw him next, or she wouldn't see him again.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475
    An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.
  • rcs1000 said:

    A much bigger risk for Trump is Georgia. His lawyers have now all flipped, and they testimony and electronic evidence could be very damning.

    I agree. Georgia poses a far greater threat to any election hopes than any of his other legal issues.
    If he loses in Georgia, presumably he also loses the federal case covering the same territory.
    There are at least a couple of important differences between the federal and Georgia cases.

    Firstly, if elected then Trump would probably be able to pardon himself on federal charges (there's an argument you can't self-pardon but Supreme Court would probably enable it). That isn't possible for a state level charge, and indeed the Governor of Georgia can't pardon, and nor can the relevant independent board until after a certain proportion of any sentence has been served.

    Secondly, the use of the rather far-reaching RICO (racketeering) laws in Georgia means prosecutors are less reliant on Trump's fingerprints being on key decisions. The point of RICO is to deal with mafia-type outfits where the kingpins leave the dirty work to others - essentially, if you're part of a "criminal enterprise" in a coordination role, you can be nailed even if you personally didn't do the dirty work.

    A huge problem for Trump with the guilty pleas so far in Georgia is they cover three different crimes - false statements to public officials (Ellis), fake electors (Cheseboro), and election machines security breach (Powell and Hall). Guilty pleas in one area can be written off as rogue employees, but multiple areas has the hallmarks of "criminal enterprise". He might, of course, be saved by one or two jurors. But, make no bones about it, the Willis case in Georgia is increasingly compelling.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    I'm on (for the GOP nomination) at an average of 20/1, along with a smaller bet on the presidency at 30/1.
    Yes that's in the money. I've done generic female at 10 so I get Haley and Harris with that ... and Michelle of course 🙂
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,360
    Sidebar: Dem share of vote in Texas has been 41.3%, 43.2% and 46.5% in last 3 presidential elections.
    I think Texas is going to be close in 2024.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What's the controversy in the Sri Lanka / Bangladesh match? I've been incommunicado for a few hours.

    First ODI player given ‘timed out’, for not being ready at the crease on time following the previous wicket. He had an issue with the strap on his helmet.
    Thanks.
    Very poor from Bangladesh and the umpires. Safety should be the number one rule - he arrived at the crease and then realised there was an issue. He should have been allowed to correct that.

    Cricket has standards and this year has seen two incidents that leave an unpleasant taste in the mouth.

    If it were just the strap then absolutely, safety has to override other issues and if he was at the pitch but his equipment broke while there then the clock should stop.

    But apparently he was out of time before the strap broke, in which case its moot surely? He should have got ready in time.
  • An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    I think he's genuinely gone a bit gaga and wasn't fibbing there, he genuinely seems to think he is/was President.

    He's utterly mad, driven entirely from narcissism.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,038
    edited November 2023
    FPT: I've started reading a little book by a local man you may have heard of: Bill Gates.

    So far - Last night I read the introduction and the first two chapters of "How to Prevent the Next Pandemic" -- I am impressed. Enough so that I am willing to recommend it, tentatively.
    https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/704751/how-to-prevent-the-next-pandemic-by-bill-gates/

    (Conspiracy theorists will be disappointed, judging by what I've read so far.)
  • Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?

    My Pillow?

    I agree he probably won't get the huge multinational corporate donors, but there are a fair few moms and pops in the USA who are also very rich entrepreneurs - there are a lot of people we've never heard of who are extremely wealthy off haulage in Texas, slaughtering hogs in Iowa, or whatever it may be.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    I am literally - LITERALLY - by the Merry Maidens. And the rain is sheeting down
  • An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    Technically he was President for part of 2021.
  • AbandonedHopeAbandonedHope Posts: 144
    edited November 2023

    I'll go a little further than others. If Haley wins the nomination, I think she might pick Asa Hutchinson as VP.
    [...]
    And the rest of his long career includes some of the kinds of experience most needed, now.

    Hutchinson is a good pick and adds a bit of age/experience/gravitas to a prospective ticket.

    But would age become an issue? He's 72 and if we're having conversations about the ages of other candidates... At what stage do you start asking "What about this guy? He's too old." A two-term Haley presidency would mean he's 80/81 when he gets his chance. I don't see it unless he follows Cheney's path - "I'll be your VP and I'll step up if necessary, but I don't want to run for it".

    A more interesting pick would be Chris Sununu. Capable, respected, well-liked and strong classic GOP principles.
    kinabalu said:

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.

    Yes. I know that feeling all too well.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,168
    edited November 2023
    rkrkrk said:

    Sidebar: Dem share of vote in Texas has been 41.3%, 43.2% and 46.5% in last 3 presidential elections.
    I think Texas is going to be close in 2024.

    GOP had a good set of midterms in Texas, though. Swing in the House elections of over 5% compared with a shade under 3% nationally. I think the only way Democrats win Texas in the reasonably short-term is in an election that isn't particularly close anyway (which is unlikely with polarisation at present). Hard to see it being pivotal at the moment.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Nigelb said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    Agree, though Ramaswamy is a bit of a wildcard in there.

    Dunno where RFKjr fits in either - I would guess he'd take a fair chunk of Trump votes if orange gob doesn't run.
    The former is probably done (though still throwing the odd $10M or so of his own cash towards the cause).

    RFK could be awkward for everyone, though his right wing backers could easily bail on him anytime. He should enjoy the grift while it lasts.
    Still find it bizarre/amusing that Larry David's screen wife is his actual wife.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937

    rcs1000 said:

    A much bigger risk for Trump is Georgia. His lawyers have now all flipped, and they testimony and electronic evidence could be very damning.

    I agree. Georgia poses a far greater threat to any election hopes than any of his other legal issues.
    And he can't pardon himself if it is state and not federal.

    America, do you really want the President sharing the nuclear football with Big Bubba in a Georgia jail cell?
  • I'll go a little further than others. If Haley wins the nomination, I think she might pick Asa Hutchinson as VP.

    This accomplishment, which I have mentioned before, from his early career, impresses me:
    "In 1982, President Ronald Reagan appointed Hutchinson U.S. attorney for the Western District of Arkansas. At age 31, Hutchinson was the nation's youngest U.S. attorney. He made national headlines after successfully prosecuting The Covenant, The Sword, and The Arm of the Lord (CSA), a white supremacist organization founded by polygamist James Ellison. The CSA forced a three-day armed standoff with local, state, and federal law enforcement. As U.S. attorney, Hutchinson personally negotiated a peaceful conclusion to the standoff."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asa_Hutchinson

    And the rest of his long career includes some of the kinds of experience most needed, now.

    (For the record: I don't think either Trump or Biden will withdraw, Trump because running gives him his best chance to stay out of jail, Biden because he believes he is the best person for the job.)

    Whatever his personal merits, Hutchinson is simply too old (for a VP - clearly he's younger than Trump or Biden but isn't at all likely to be standing in 2032) and too anti-Trump. In the unlikely event Haley got it, I don't think he'd be anywhere near her VP shortlist.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937

    Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?

    My Pillow?

    I agree he probably won't get the huge multinational corporate donors, but there are a fair few moms and pops in the USA who are also very rich entrepreneurs - there are a lot of people we've never heard of who are extremely wealthy off haulage in Texas, slaughtering hogs in Iowa, or whatever it may be.
    But these are the people going to be turned off by a guy who has cooked the books to get cheap loans, whilst they struggled to keep their businesses afloat...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661

    An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    Technically he was President for part of 2021.
    Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
  • Labour leads by 17% nationally.

    Westminster VI (5 November):

    Labour 45% (–)
    Conservative 28% (+3)
    Liberal Democrat 11% (-2)
    Reform UK 9% (+2)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 2% (-1)
    Other 1% (-1)

    Changes +/- 29 October

    https://x.com/redfieldwilton/status/1721573159563153448?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
    I keep thinking there is money on the table. But then I worry that I am thinking sanely and rationally. And that a large chunk of America has

    1) Jumped the shark
    2) Likes jumping the shark
    3) Wants to jump the shark again, jumping over another shark

    Right now, I wonder on the odds for Jefferson Davis being the next US President. I mean, he's a dead traitor to the Republic, but....
  • Labour leads by 17% nationally.

    Westminster VI (5 November):

    Labour 45% (–)
    Conservative 28% (+3)
    Liberal Democrat 11% (-2)
    Reform UK 9% (+2)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 2% (-1)
    Other 1% (-1)

    Changes +/- 29 October

    https://x.com/redfieldwilton/status/1721573159563153448?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g

    Suella Surge Klaxon!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125

    Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?

    My Pillow?

    I agree he probably won't get the huge multinational corporate donors, but there are a fair few moms and pops in the USA who are also very rich entrepreneurs - there are a lot of people we've never heard of who are extremely wealthy off haulage in Texas, slaughtering hogs in Iowa, or whatever it may be.
    But these are the people going to be turned off by a guy who has cooked the books to get cheap loans, whilst they struggled to keep their businesses afloat...
    The reality denial among Deep MAGA is...


  • Worth noting that the New York case has already been lost by the Trump Empire - the issue is about how much repartions get given to the state by his fraud. Starts at $250 m, without any compound interest.

    That wipes out Trump.

    He is then dependent upon people funding his campaign. That's a lot of moms and pops putting in ten bucks a time. Is he really going to be getting big business donors?

    My Pillow?

    I agree he probably won't get the huge multinational corporate donors, but there are a fair few moms and pops in the USA who are also very rich entrepreneurs - there are a lot of people we've never heard of who are extremely wealthy off haulage in Texas, slaughtering hogs in Iowa, or whatever it may be.
    But these are the people going to be turned off by a guy who has cooked the books to get cheap loans, whilst they struggled to keep their businesses afloat...
    One would like to think so, but they were happy enough to back him when he said paying tax was a mug's game. Trump voters love all this "maverick, beating the system" stuff even if, stepping back, he's actually robbing them blind.
  • kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
    I keep thinking there is money on the table. But then I worry that I am thinking sanely and rationally. And that a large chunk of America has

    1) Jumped the shark
    2) Likes jumping the shark
    3) Wants to jump the shark again, jumping over another shark

    Right now, I wonder on the odds for Jefferson Davis being the next US President. I mean, he's a dead traitor to the Republic, but....
    Yes, I'm not putting my hard earned money anywhere near this market.

    I'm rational, and too many Americans it seems are not, and they get a vote and I don't. So I can't trust my judgement here.

    For the sake of America, democracy and the world I hope that Trump loses. But he might not and I can't think impartially enough to be betting here.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,399
    edited November 2023
    Ghedebrav said:

    Nigelb said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Trump is barred, the GOP candidate will be DeSantis I think.

    Haley for me.
    Agree, though Ramaswamy is a bit of a wildcard in there.

    Dunno where RFKjr fits in either - I would guess he'd take a fair chunk of Trump votes if orange gob doesn't run.
    The former is probably done (though still throwing the odd $10M or so of his own cash towards the cause).

    RFK could be awkward for everyone, though his right wing backers could easily bail on him anytime. He should enjoy the grift while it lasts.
    Still find it bizarre/amusing that Larry David's screen wife is his actual wife.
    Mrs Brown is married to her daughter. But Judi Dench is not married to Geoffrey Palmer. The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    edited November 2023
    kinabalu said:

    An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    Technically he was President for part of 2021.
    Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
    It says something that Peru managed to deal with attempted coup by the President better than the US.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    rkrkrk said:

    Sidebar: Dem share of vote in Texas has been 41.3%, 43.2% and 46.5% in last 3 presidential elections.
    I think Texas is going to be close in 2024.

    I seem to remember reading an Economist piece in something like 2002 or 2003 about Texas trending Blue. It's been taking its sweet time getting there and I wouldn't expect crossover for a good while yet.

    We all know Texas is big, almost as big as Yorkshire, but easy to forget that within that size is an extraordinary diversity - geographically, culturally, demographically, economically.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,908
    Been catching a bit of the live hearings in New York.

    Off he went with a Trumpety-Trump:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on China and Russia.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.


    Ooops.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-67314495
  • 148grss said:

    "Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."

    I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.

    I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.

    I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.

    What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.

    I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,908

    viewcode said:

    The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife

    Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
    Designed around European Royal Families, by the sound of it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,908
    Ghedebrav said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sidebar: Dem share of vote in Texas has been 41.3%, 43.2% and 46.5% in last 3 presidential elections.
    I think Texas is going to be close in 2024.

    I seem to remember reading an Economist piece in something like 2002 or 2003 about Texas trending Blue. It's been taking its sweet time getting there and I wouldn't expect crossover for a good while yet.

    We all know Texas is big, almost as big as Yorkshire, but easy to forget that within that size is an extraordinary diversity - geographically, culturally, demographically, economically.
    There's a big de-gerrymandering legal case in Texas, iirc.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125

    148grss said:

    "Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."

    I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.

    I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.

    I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.

    What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.

    I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
    How much do you want bet?

    Given recent developments in the US, a Supreme Court ruling written via Ouija Board would not even raise my left eyebrow by more than an angstrom.
  • 148grss said:

    "Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."

    I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.

    I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.

    I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.

    What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.

    I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
    He might give it a go, but I fear he'd have a spot of trouble gripping the pen these days - his fingers are somewhat more ethereal than they were ten years ago.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,399

    viewcode said:

    The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife

    Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
    The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.

    Simples.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
    I keep thinking there is money on the table. But then I worry that I am thinking sanely and rationally. And that a large chunk of America has

    1) Jumped the shark
    2) Likes jumping the shark
    3) Wants to jump the shark again, jumping over another shark

    Right now, I wonder on the odds for Jefferson Davis being the next US President. I mean, he's a dead traitor to the Republic, but....
    Yes, I'm not putting my hard earned money anywhere near this market.

    I'm rational, and too many Americans it seems are not, and they get a vote and I don't. So I can't trust my judgement here.

    For the sake of America, democracy and the world I hope that Trump loses. But he might not and I can't think impartially enough to be betting here.
    Or, Americans have rationally decided that - mad as Trump is - he is less of a threat to American wellbeing than the Woke Democrats

    Personally, I don’t agree. I’ve already made the analogy that Trump is the polar bear sharing an ice floe with us. Eventually the ice floe of Wokeness will melt - drowning us - but the immediate danger is the bear. So you shoot the bear first then worry about the melting

    However I can see how you might rationally arrive at a different conclusion. Especially if you are a white American. Factor that in to any betting
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661

    kinabalu said:

    An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    Technically he was President for part of 2021.
    Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
    It says something that Peru managed to deal with attempted coup by the President better than the US.
    And Bolsonaro didn't kick off.

    With the way the GOP are going "Like a Banana Republic" could soon rather flatter the US.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
    I keep thinking there is money on the table. But then I worry that I am thinking sanely and rationally. And that a large chunk of America has

    1) Jumped the shark
    2) Likes jumping the shark
    3) Wants to jump the shark again, jumping over another shark

    Right now, I wonder on the odds for Jefferson Davis being the next US President. I mean, he's a dead traitor to the Republic, but....
    Fair enough. Gotta be innit to winnit though.
  • I wonder if Donald Trump Jr is worth a tiny flutter at extremely long odds for next year?

    He's come out of this fraud trial pretty well so far - his father has been aggressive, his brother defensive, whereas Don Jr actually seems to have managed to turn on the charm (hard to believe though that is based on his record).
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,385

    Labour leads by 17% nationally.

    Westminster VI (5 November):

    Labour 45% (–)
    Conservative 28% (+3)
    Liberal Democrat 11% (-2)
    Reform UK 9% (+2)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 2% (-1)
    Other 1% (-1)

    Changes +/- 29 October

    https://x.com/redfieldwilton/status/1721573159563153448?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g


    A few Con to Lib-Dem switchers looking at how the Labour membership is behaving over Gaza and getting a bit twitchy?
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife

    Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
    The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.

    Simples.
    Timey wimey stuff, as I believe Ten put it.
  • kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    An interaction from the Trump case today:

    The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.

    “I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.

    "For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.

    Trump says no.

    Technically he was President for part of 2021.
    Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
    It says something that Peru managed to deal with attempted coup by the President better than the US.
    And Bolsonaro didn't kick off.

    Are you sure?
  • I wonder if Donald Trump Jr is worth a tiny flutter at extremely long odds for next year?

    He's come out of this fraud trial pretty well so far - his father has been aggressive, his brother defensive, whereas Don Jr actually seems to have managed to turn on the charm (hard to believe though that is based on his record).

    No.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937

    I wonder if Donald Trump Jr is worth a tiny flutter at extremely long odds for next year?

    He's come out of this fraud trial pretty well so far - his father has been aggressive, his brother defensive, whereas Don Jr actually seems to have managed to turn on the charm (hard to believe though that is based on his record).

    Trump Junior tried to tread the tricky path of Smartest Guy in the Room and the stupid part of Dumb and Dumber.

    Not sure he pulled it off. There may yet be criminal charges heading his way too.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Yesterday we were vaguely discussing how people had lived with animals all their lives etc.,.

    This evening Casa Cyclefree has reverted to an even older habit: sitting with our animals round a fire on which we cook - braising steak + veg - very slowly,

    All we need now is a storyteller telling tales.


  • I wonder if Donald Trump Jr is worth a tiny flutter at extremely long odds for next year?

    He's come out of this fraud trial pretty well so far - his father has been aggressive, his brother defensive, whereas Don Jr actually seems to have managed to turn on the charm (hard to believe though that is based on his record).

    Trump Junior tried to tread the tricky path of Smartest Guy in the Room and the stupid part of Dumb and Dumber.

    Not sure he pulled it off. There may yet be criminal charges heading his way too.
    I think you and SSI are probably right. It's his availability at odds of upwards of 1000-1 that creates the slight temptation. But it would take an outlandish set of circumstances that probably make him expensive at any price.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Factor this in as well

    The NYT on why it will almost certainly be Biden, again

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-primary-challenger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

    It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    GIN1138 said:

    Labour leads by 17% nationally.

    Westminster VI (5 November):

    Labour 45% (–)
    Conservative 28% (+3)
    Liberal Democrat 11% (-2)
    Reform UK 9% (+2)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 2% (-1)
    Other 1% (-1)

    Changes +/- 29 October

    https://x.com/redfieldwilton/status/1721573159563153448?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g


    A few Con to Lib-Dem switchers looking at how the Labour membership is behaving over Gaza and getting a bit twitchy?
    Margin of error stuff - meaningless

    That poll says No Change to me
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    Leon said:

    Factor this in as well

    The NYT on why it will almost certainly be Biden, again

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-primary-challenger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

    It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside

    When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,591
    Given the current make up of the Supreme court I would have thought it was very clear which way things would go.

    Any attempt to remove Trump from the ballot would be striked down by a 5-4 or 6-3 margin...
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.

    My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.

    I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.

    My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.

    I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.

    There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.

    You know the 'woosh relief' feeling you get when you discover the fetish you've been thinking you're alone in having is actually shared by others? Well thanks for delivering it to me here. Yes, no Biden and (definitely) no Trump. That's how I think it will pan out too. It's an implied big price if you can find a way to back it.
    Was discussing the election with relatives (Democrats) and some American colleagues. Haley keeps coming up among the more thoughtful... I just worry (from a betting angle) that this is hope casting for sanity.
    Do you have a book going on WH24?
    I keep thinking there is money on the table. But then I worry that I am thinking sanely and rationally. And that a large chunk of America has

    1) Jumped the shark
    2) Likes jumping the shark
    3) Wants to jump the shark again, jumping over another shark

    Right now, I wonder on the odds for Jefferson Davis being the next US President. I mean, he's a dead traitor to the Republic, but....
    Yes, I'm not putting my hard earned money anywhere near this market.

    I'm rational, and too many Americans it seems are not, and they get a vote and I don't. So I can't trust my judgement here.

    For the sake of America, democracy and the world I hope that Trump loses. But he might not and I can't think impartially enough to be betting here.
    Or, Americans have rationally decided that - mad as Trump is - he is less of a threat to American wellbeing than the Woke Democrats

    Personally, I don’t agree. I’ve already made the analogy that Trump is the polar bear sharing an ice floe with us. Eventually the ice floe of Wokeness will melt - drowning us - but the immediate danger is the bear. So you shoot the bear first then worry about the melting

    However I can see how you might rationally arrive at a different conclusion. Especially if you are a white American. Factor that in to any betting
    In a way the betting market on next POTUS is surreal. if you look at just three outcomes, Trump, Biden, AN Other, the markets are roughly split evenly between those outcomes. However individually each of the outcomes looks impossible - the first two are unelectable, (Biden only on account of age) and there isn't an AN Other candidate identifiable as an individual who can get the votes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited November 2023

    Leon said:

    Factor this in as well

    The NYT on why it will almost certainly be Biden, again

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-primary-challenger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

    It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside

    When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
    Indeed

    That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it

    Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,044
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife

    Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
    The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.

    Simples.
    Saint RTD says the new stuff is a complete reboot.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,399

    Leon said:

    Factor this in as well

    The NYT on why it will almost certainly be Biden, again

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-primary-challenger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

    It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside

    When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
    My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?

  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,360

    rkrkrk said:

    Sidebar: Dem share of vote in Texas has been 41.3%, 43.2% and 46.5% in last 3 presidential elections.
    I think Texas is going to be close in 2024.

    GOP had a good set of midterms in Texas, though. Swing in the House elections of over 5% compared with a shade under 3% nationally. I think the only way Democrats win Texas in the reasonably short-term is in an election that isn't particularly close anyway (which is unlikely with polarisation at present). Hard to see it being pivotal at the moment.
    Fair point, but I think Presidential elections are different. Higher turnout probably helps the Dems.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    edited November 2023
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Factor this in as well

    The NYT on why it will almost certainly be Biden, again

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-primary-challenger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

    It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside

    When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
    Indeed

    That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it

    Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
    Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the President’s ear, that perhaps he should stand down.

    That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,399
    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife

    Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
    The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.

    Simples.
    Saint RTD says the new stuff is a complete reboot.
    Well yes, but given his committment to not undoing the Timeless Child it may be only nominal.
This discussion has been closed.