politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Trump remains a 49% chance of regaining the White House – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,159
edited February 4 in General
imageTrump remains a 49% chance of regaining the White House – politicalbetting.com

Although is is looking more likely that Trump will win I’m not tempted to bet for two reasons – the odds seem to tight and there’s a risk that the courts or his health could become a big obstacle.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    To those who watched already, Masters of the Air

    How long are the episodes, would it be a better experience to watch 2 over consecutive days?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    MoonRabbit said:

    To those who watched already, Masters of the Air

    How long are the episodes, would it be a better experience to watch 2 over consecutive days?

    Wifey watching now - believe they are an hour long.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    On topic, as was off topic, your caution Mike seems sensible as it does seem a long way to go still, how accurate this far out has polling and betting markets tend to be?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    "the odds seem too tight...."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354
    I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867
    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Alonso is odds-on favourite for next Liverpool manager now he has left Formula One.
    https://www.oddschecker.com/football/football-specials/liverpool/next-permanent-manager
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,128
    About 10th.

    I hear somewhat indirectly (from someone who gets the Ashfield Independent newsletter) that Zadrozny is planning to stand at the Election.

    Ooooer Missus.
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,639
    edited January 26
    MoonRabbit said:

    To those who watched already, Masters of the Air

    How long are the episodes, would it be a better experience to watch 2 over consecutive days?

    First two eps are up, the rest will be released one every Friday. Nine eps in all. Apple don’t drop new full seasons in one go, they make you wait, the swine. Though I do like that, it feels a bit special and old school rather than just binging something in one lump.

    So if you do want to binge you’ll have to be patient.

    Think I’ll watch the first two tomorrow.

    EDIT - I totally misread your comment. I’m a dumbass. I blame my excitement about watching it.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,522
    FPT
    sarissa said:

    DavidL said:

    Also terrible numbers for the SNP who were often touching 5% the last time. It appears that their support might roughly halve in a lot of the current polling. Whilst I suspect that they will get some swingback from Independence supporters currently scunnered of them in Scotland it is going to be a competition between them and the Tories about whose vote has fallen more in some seats and the frankly bizarre possibility of a falling Conservative support picking up a seat or two.

    FPTP. You gotta love it.

    The Scotland sub-sample (i know, I know) shows a 12 point SNP lead over Slab. I suspect they would be clinging to that like a shipwrecked sailor to the last lifebelt.
    Are we talking about the same poll? The subsample seems to show a 6-point Lab lead over SNP?

    https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_Immigration_Cons_240117_W.pdf
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,149
    edited January 26
    MoonRabbit said:

    On topic, as was off topic, your caution Mike seems sensible as it does seem a long way to go still, how accurate this far out has polling and betting markets tend to be?

    Not particularly accurate... but this is a very unusual election in that it's pretty clear who the two main candidates are, and they are extremely well known to the general public.

    There are just very few people who don't already have a view on both Biden and Trump, and those views aren't that likely to change a great deal over the next few months. Normally, a challenger will be recognisable (a Senator or Governor who has been around for a while) but people won't have particularly strong views on them at this early stage - so there is a lot of room for polls to move as they see and learn more. Not this year, though.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    SirNorfolkPassmore said:

    MoonRabbit said:

    On topic, as was off topic, your caution Mike seems sensible as it does seem a long way to go still, how accurate this far out has polling and betting markets tend to be?

    Not particularly accurate... but this is a very unusual election in that it's pretty clear who the two main candidates are, and they are extremely well known to the general public.

    There are just very few people who don't already have a view on both Biden and Trump, and those views aren't that likely to change a great deal over the next few months. Normally, a challenger will be recognisable (a Senator or Governor who has been around for a while) but people won't have particularly strong views on them at this early stage - so there is a lot of room for polls to move as they see and learn more. Not this year, though.
    And the Trumpites will be watching Fox and Bidenistas CNN. How are they really going to change their minds?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    LostPassword said:

    I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?

    The Democrats are pretty much certain to lose the Senate: West Virginia is definitely gone, it would be extremely surprising if they held Montana, and Arizona is 50/50.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,344
    LostPassword said:

    I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?

    As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.

    The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    MattW said:

    About 10th.

    I hear somewhat indirectly (from someone who gets the Ashfield Independent newsletter) that Zadrozny is planning to stand at the Election.

    Ooooer Missus.

    Doesn't he have... ummm... some legal issues? That might, potentially, result in prison time.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    ...
    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    40% are shocked.
    40% are relieved
    20% are watching Love Island
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,998
    FPT: An Ethiopian might argue that WW II began in 1935:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ethiopia#Italian_occupation_(1936–1941)

    Brazil joined the allies in 1942, and even eventually provided some troops for service in Italy. (The bases they provided were probably their most import contribution.)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,098
    There are value lays and then there’s this. Trump at evens. Come the summer you'll all be wishing you'd done it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    edited January 26
    Jim_Miller said:

    FPT: An Ethiopian might argue that WW II began in 1935:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ethiopia#Italian_occupation_(1936–1941)

    Brazil joined the allies in 1942, and even eventually provided some troops for service in Italy. (The bases they provided were probably their most import contribution.)

    Air force contingent in the Med, too. And convoy battles as well, both as escorts and as mercantile marine, in [ed] the Atlantic.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354
    kinabalu said:

    There are value lays and then there’s this. Trump at evens. Come the summer you'll all be wishing you'd done it.

    Weren't you saying he wouldn't get the nomination? Do you not think you might have called this one wrong?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    kinabalu said:

    There are value lays and then there’s this. Trump at evens. Come the summer you'll all be wishing you'd done it.

    You have been laying him for three years at much higher odds! Very brave if you are going in for more.

    I think evens about right fwiw. Probably a small lay. I am beginning to wonder on the Supreme Court though.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,580
    edited January 26
    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    This is the biggest story of next week.

    The Feds have decided not to enforce laws related to illegal immigration.

    The State has decided to step up and build a fence.

    The Supreme Court has said that the Feds have jurisdiction over the border.

    There’s now the suggestion of conflict between the Texas National Guard, and the Federal Border Patrol.

    Democrats have been calling for the Federalisation of the TNG, and Republicans have been calling for the border to be enforced according to existing Federal law.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,742
    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Is the consensus of opinion that the odds of Trump winning are distorted by so many supporters placing bets?

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,580
    darkage said:

    Is the consensus of opinion that the odds of Trump winning are distorted by so many supporters placing bets?

    Or the opposite, that opponents of Trump are betting against him.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    It is unfortunate the republicans didn't go for desantis.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    Why ignoring everything else is the opposition candidate clearly leading in the polls during a period when western governments of all shades are getting kicked out at the ballot box 50/50?

    And there is more evidence that the court cases have so far helped Trump than that they are damaging him. Normal rules and standard most certainly do not apply.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,366
    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,700

    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    1h
    This level of polling is not sustainable for Rishi Sunak.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Sky News have apologised for this interview. If you look at the presenter’s X account, @belledonati it’s obvious she has picked a side in the conflict

    https://x.com/dannydanon/status/1750909094716715172?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    Errr... Love Island?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    edited January 26
    david_herdson said:

    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.

    Pretty much agree, although I think Trump should be lower. I would have thought Haley should be in there (admittedly on a low number, but enough to show). She isn't going to beat Trump, but if any of the things I mentioned in my other post knock Trump out she is likely to be the Republican candidate, which is why I assume she is staying in the fight.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    https://x.com/emmanuelmacron/status/1750705399550902544

    30,000 Indian students in France in 2030.

    It’s a very ambitious target, but I am determined to make it happen.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    MoonRabbit said:

    To those who watched already, Masters of the Air

    How long are the episodes, would it be a better experience to watch 2 over consecutive days?

    Contrary to what I thought earlier, they’ve only released the first two, with the next due 2 Feb. Doubtless to thwart anyone taking a free seven day trial to watch the lot. Nevertheless it looks good enough to be worth one month’s £8.99 to watch,
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    rottenborough said:


    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    1h
    This level of polling is not sustainable for Rishi Sunak.

    Thats alright, no reason he can't make it a tad lower given time.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    rcs1000 said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    Errr... Love Island?
    Here's what you could have won.....
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    edited January 26
    In the last thread IanB2 set this challenge:

    The inbuilt contradiction of British politics is that while many if not most of the people actively involved in it want radical changes, of hugely varying nature, most of the voters just want sensible moderation. Discuss.

    Which invites the further question: Given where we actually are at the moment, what would 'sensible moderation' look like? What are its principles, what are its policies, how would it differ from either Labour or Tory proposals?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    Sandpit said:

    darkage said:

    Is the consensus of opinion that the odds of Trump winning are distorted by so many supporters placing bets?

    Or the opposite, that opponents of Trump are betting against him.
    I think the odds are broadly right: Trump is a 50% chance (or thereabouts) of being next President.

    That said, there's a not insubstantial chance - given his age, stress and lifestyle - that he succumbs to a medical issue in the next 9 months. So maybe 45% is more like it.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354
    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,728
    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,068
    darkage said:

    Is the consensus of opinion that the odds of Trump winning are distorted by so many supporters placing bets?

    (at last a sensible question)

    I think that to be the case. Political gamblers are different from other gamblers, insofar as the rich ones have different political views to the poor ones, thus skewing the odds (that happened in EU Ref, btw). The reason why I am tearing my hair out is that I can construct plausible reasons why Biden will win (abortion+independents) and why Trump will win (immigration+differential non-response). Hence my gritted and splintered teeth.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,627
    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.

    Not that I was trolling...
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    noneoftheabove said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    Why ignoring everything else is the opposition candidate clearly leading in the polls during a period when western governments of all shades are getting kicked out at the ballot box 50/50?

    And there is more evidence that the court cases have so far helped Trump than that they are damaging him. Normal rules and standard most certainly do not apply.
    They are helping him a lot currently, but not a single one has been decided yet. Going to prison, two huge damages decisions, being knocked off umpteen ballots - Any of those could be terminal and none are improbable.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    edited January 26
    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.

    (There is a third issue about medical fitness, but that is not really something that can be calculated).
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,728
    david_herdson said:

    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.

    I suppose it depends what you mean by health. Is Trump going to have some kind of episode in the next nine months that rules him out? Very unlikely.

    Yet what is more of a possibility is that an obvious decline renders him a less effective candidate than he otherwise would be outside those who would support him if he were a corpse being propped up by Don, Jr., and Eric.

    The key to the election will almost certainly be those who think both candidates are a poor choice but will be forced to choose. Trump being an obvious shambles would be a big problem if Biden is still merely doddery.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    kjh said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    Why ignoring everything else is the opposition candidate clearly leading in the polls during a period when western governments of all shades are getting kicked out at the ballot box 50/50?

    And there is more evidence that the court cases have so far helped Trump than that they are damaging him. Normal rules and standard most certainly do not apply.
    They are helping him a lot currently, but not a single one has been decided yet. Going to prison, two huge damages decisions, being knocked off umpteen ballots - Any of those could be terminal and none are improbable.
    The martyr effect could also boost him further and redouble the determination of his supporters to vote, and give them the right to cheat (in their minds protect) the election counts.

    Who knows? I would strongly caution against assuming normal democratic rules and trends can be relied on for this one.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    ...
    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    I do think Trump is too short, if anything because we have not had the ballot access judgment through yet.

    And I know many people’s gut view is that he won’t be prevented from running, but that is still a massive unknown in my book. It deserves more scrutiny - I think it is a bit too presumptuous to just assume SCOTUS will swat it away.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,357
    Jim_Miller said:

    FPT: An Ethiopian might argue that WW II began in 1935:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ethiopia#Italian_occupation_(1936–1941)

    Brazil joined the allies in 1942, and even eventually provided some troops for service in Italy. (The bases they provided were probably their most import contribution.)

    The Chinese, meanwhile, irritably point out that it began on 18th September 1931;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukden_incident
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354
    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    edited January 26
    MJW said:

    david_herdson said:

    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.

    I suppose it depends what you mean by health. Is Trump going to have some kind of episode in the next nine months that rules him out? Very unlikely.

    Yet what is more of a possibility is that an obvious decline renders him a less effective candidate than he otherwise would be outside those who would support him if he were a corpse being propped up by Don, Jr., and Eric.

    The key to the election will almost certainly be those who think both candidates are a poor choice but will be forced to choose. Trump being an obvious shambles would be a big problem if Biden is still merely doddery.
    Personally I’m not sure how the guy’s health holds up. Imagine being such a giant ball of stress and resentment and bitterness and anger literally all of the time. The strain he puts on himself is monumental.
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 774
    https://twitter.com/wethinkpolling/status/1750917287526519012

    Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead.
    🔴 Lab 47% (-1)
    🔵 Con 23% (NC)
    🟠 LD 9% (NC)
    ⚪ Ref 12% (+2)
    🟢 Green 6% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
  • eekeek Posts: 28,366
    numbertwelve said:

    MJW said:

    david_herdson said:

    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.

    I suppose it depends what you mean by health. Is Trump going to have some kind of episode in the next nine months that rules him out? Very unlikely.

    Yet what is more of a possibility is that an obvious decline renders him a less effective candidate than he otherwise would be outside those who would support him if he were a corpse being propped up by Don, Jr., and Eric.

    The key to the election will almost certainly be those who think both candidates are a poor choice but will be forced to choose. Trump being an obvious shambles would be a big problem if Biden is still merely doddery.
    Personally I’m not sure how the guy’s health holds up. Imagine being such a giant ball of stress and resentment and bitterness and anger literally all of the time. The strain he puts on himself is monumental.
    It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump won and within a day or so of winning (before inauguration) keeled over and died from the relief of escaping the other cases
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 774
    Polling averages for this week.



    Points to note: Conservatives continue to decline, Reform have overtaken Lib Dems for the first time.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653
    edited January 26
    NickyBreakspear said:

    Polling averages for this week.



    Points to note: Conservatives continue to decline, Reform have overtaken Lib Dems for the first time.

    Thanks Nicky.

    Other point to note: Tory average is the lowest it has been since Truss resigned.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,407
    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    Foxy said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.

    Not that I was trolling...
    Hold my porridge ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/jan/26/english-breakfast-society-recommends-swapping-tomato-for-pineapple

    'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    Biden stops pending approvals of LNG exports. Bad news for Europe?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/01/26/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-decision-to-pause-pending-approvals-of-liquefied-natural-gas-exports/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    numbertwelve said:

    MJW said:

    david_herdson said:

    On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.

    Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.

    I suppose it depends what you mean by health. Is Trump going to have some kind of episode in the next nine months that rules him out? Very unlikely.

    Yet what is more of a possibility is that an obvious decline renders him a less effective candidate than he otherwise would be outside those who would support him if he were a corpse being propped up by Don, Jr., and Eric.

    The key to the election will almost certainly be those who think both candidates are a poor choice but will be forced to choose. Trump being an obvious shambles would be a big problem if Biden is still merely doddery.
    Personally I’m not sure how the guy’s health holds up. Imagine being such a giant ball of stress and resentment and bitterness and anger literally all of the time. The strain he puts on himself is monumental.
    I don't think he finds legal conflict stressful. He thrives on it.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.

    Not that I was trolling...
    Hold my porridge ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/jan/26/english-breakfast-society-recommends-swapping-tomato-for-pineapple

    'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
    Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)

    Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    Cancer - he wouldn't make it public. Dementia - how would one tell?
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 774
    Benpointer said:

    NickyBreakspear said:

    Polling averages for this week.



    Points to note: Conservatives continue to decline, Reform have overtaken Lib Dems for the first time.

    Thanks Nicky.

    Other point to note: Tory average is the lowest it has been since Truss resigned.
    Effectively. The week ending 28 October 2022 would include a few days of Sunak as PM. 24.2% compared with 24.3% this week.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    williamglenn said:

    Biden stops pending approvals of LNG exports. Bad news for Europe?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/01/26/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-decision-to-pause-pending-approvals-of-liquefied-natural-gas-exports/

    Yes, but unlikely to have an impact until winter 25/26 as there is plenty of permitted LNG export for now.

    Bad for my GTT shareholding, mind
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
    TBF she lasted 5 days longer than Cloughie. We'll take that as a win.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    According to this, the chance of dying within a year for someone aged 80 is 5.8%.

    https://www.finder.com/life-insurance/odds-of-dying
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    NickyBreakspear said:

    https://twitter.com/wethinkpolling/status/1750917287526519012

    Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead.
    🔴 Lab 47% (-1)
    🔵 Con 23% (NC)
    🟠 LD 9% (NC)
    ⚪ Ref 12% (+2)
    🟢 Green 6% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    The LDs need to do something before they get overtaken by the Greens as well.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    What are the odds on Trump choosing one of his children for the VP spot?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Mexicanpete said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
    And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.

    At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    If the Democrats could pick an ideal candidate they would walk the election (as would the Republicans of course).

    Neither can, they have primaries where at best a reasonable candidate emerges after an intra party bun fight exposing all sorts of splits. At worst you get nutters emerge after the same.

    Biden is a terrible candidate but better than the expected average candidate after a contested Democratic primary.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    According to this, the chance of dying within a year for someone aged 80 is 5.8%.

    https://www.finder.com/life-insurance/odds-of-dying
    That's dying.

    But there are plenty of health issues that fall far short of dying that can incapacitate you.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Andy_JS said:

    NickyBreakspear said:

    https://twitter.com/wethinkpolling/status/1750917287526519012

    Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead.
    🔴 Lab 47% (-1)
    🔵 Con 23% (NC)
    🟠 LD 9% (NC)
    ⚪ Ref 12% (+2)
    🟢 Green 6% (+1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    The LDs need to do something before they get overtaken by the Greens as well.
    Change their leader?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    edited January 26
    Mexicanpete said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.

    Not that I was trolling...
    Hold my porridge ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/jan/26/english-breakfast-society-recommends-swapping-tomato-for-pineapple

    'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
    Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)

    Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
    Heather [edit] or at least decent honey, from around here. I used to take salt but Mrs C weaned me off.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,812
    rcs1000 said:

    What are the odds on Trump choosing one of his children for the VP spot?

    I think Don Jr at 1000 is a strong bet for the Presidency given a potential for Trump himself to be disqualified.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    noneoftheabove said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    Cancer - he wouldn't make it public. Dementia - how would one tell?
    He might not make it public, but none of the treatments are pleasant, or particularly easy to hide.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
    And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.

    At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
    When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
    TBF she lasted 5 days longer than Cloughie. We'll take that as a win.
    Except after he moved on, Cloughie won two European Cups.

    Liz Truss? Not so much...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
    And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.

    At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
    When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
    Trump University?
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 774
    The other point to mention on current polls is that the Conservative vote variance is 9% (Savanta vs YouGov) whilst Labour is only 4% (Savanta vs YouGov and We Think).

    We are likely to have Opinium this weekend and their polls are consistently lower for Labour than the six polling companies included in my average.

    In fact Opinium is consistently polling Labour lower by a similar percentage as YouGov is consistently polling Conservatives compared with average.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,027
    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    I would just say that upto the 17th October 2023 my health for my age was reasonable, then out of the blue I had a massive DVT which led to lots of tests and the cardiologist verdict my heart was worn out and I need a pacemaker which is due on the 6th February

    Biden is only a year or so older so yes, health at our ages cannot be taken for granted
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
    TBF she lasted 5 days longer than Cloughie. We'll take that as a win.
    Except after he moved on, Cloughie won two European Cups.

    Liz Truss? Not so much...
    Give her time...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    edited January 26
    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    According to this, the chance of dying within a year for someone aged 80 is 5.8%.

    https://www.finder.com/life-insurance/odds-of-dying
    That's dying.

    But there are plenty of health issues that fall far short of dying that can incapacitate you.
    Trump is going to have to deal with the stress of a large cheque written out for his defamation case. Then his New York property empire disbanded and a lifetime ban from being a property fraudster magnate in New York - and a humongous cheque to the state for that fraud.

    That's going to take a toll. At the very least, it is going to cause a worldwide block caps shortage as he vents his spleen...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653
    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
    And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.

    At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
    Very true, but unfortunately if he loses to Trump the latter will be pulling the edifice of democracy down anyway.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
    TBF she lasted 5 days longer than Cloughie. We'll take that as a win.
    Except after he moved on, Cloughie won two European Cups.

    Liz Truss? Not so much...
    Give her time...
    You think she might have great success in Europe? That would be - startling....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    rcs1000 said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    LostPassword said:

    algarkirk said:

    LostPassword said:

    kjh said:

    I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.

    I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.

    I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.

    And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?

    My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
    The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:

    Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.

    Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.

    At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
    I'm inclined to agree.

    For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.

    But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.

    Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
    To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.

    Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
    She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
    And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.

    At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
    When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
    Trump University?
    He could of course always re-purpose the unused graduation certificate pro-formas whilst in the bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Useful for when he runs out of usable classified documents.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,986
    Up to a dozen former special advisers, who honed their strategic skills in the governments of Theresa May, Boris Johnson or Liz Truss, have teamed up with “a group of around ten Tory MPs” to oust Sunak. Although the rule of political exaggeration means “around ten” is probably “five”. And at least two of those are because someone thought lanky Simon Clarke was actually several people on each other’s shoulders hidden under a trenchcoat.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/excited-to-see-the-new-west-end-show-about-the-great-tory-revival-i-really-cba-qd6d32352
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:

    For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.

    The same, of course, is true of Biden.

    I would just say that upto the 17th October 2023 my health for my age was reasonable, then out of the blue I had a massive DVT which led to lots of tests and the cardiologist verdict my heart was worn out and I need a pacemaker which is due on the 6th February

    Biden is only a year or so older so yes, health at our ages cannot be taken for granted
    Best wishes for the 6th Feb and beyond Big_G!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,986
    @benatipsos

    Our latest data seems to confirm that all political careers end in failure


  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,009
    Mexicanpete said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    williamglenn said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.

    Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.

    And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
    You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?

    I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
    As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
    I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.

    Not that I was trolling...
    Hold my porridge ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/jan/26/english-breakfast-society-recommends-swapping-tomato-for-pineapple

    'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
    Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)

    Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
    Porridge.

    Made with milk, with added sultanas or dates. No need for any white or brown crystals.

    Jumbo oats, ideally.

    Don't add fresh blueberries, as purple porridge is a bit off-putting.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    ...

    MJW said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    eek said:

    Taz said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season..

    Wayne Rooney is looking for a top six club to manage
    José Mourinho wants to return to the Premiership
    I was asking earlier if the Reds had their own Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes in mind. And the BBC have provided the answer. Stevie G.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68106586
    Jose would be the equivalent of Brian Clough to Leeds.
    Or Liz Truss to Downing Street.
    That much of a bloodbath?
    TBF she lasted 5 days longer than Cloughie. We'll take that as a win.
    Except after he moved on, Cloughie won two European Cups.

    Liz Truss? Not so much...
    Give her time...
    You think she might have great success in Europe? That would be - startling....
    She's partnering with Mourinho, so anything is possible.
This discussion has been closed.