Categories
Options
Punters largely staying with Trump in the WH2024 betting – politicalbetting.com
Punters largely staying with Trump in the WH2024 betting – politicalbetting.com
There are so many issues and court cases concerning Trump that it is very hard to monitor.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If the 'Deep State' Trump wouldn't have got anywhere near the White House in the first place.
Am I the only one who is bored by Trump V Biden?
John Bolton spouting bollocks about "only language they understand" yet again.
Ha ha ha.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/elections/election-countdown/64633/is-labours-lead-as-big-as-the-polls-suggest
So the story goes, an event there ran out of beer. Since it is separate from the actual brewery, no one had access. So no more beer.
So they failed at organising a pissup in a brewery.
If they haven't already I expect one of the crypto markets will start offering yield on your stake, which should fix this.
I'd go for Buttigieg vs Haley.
Or, if we want someone from the MAGA side of the tracks, how about Buttigieg vs Vance? (Albeit Vance is a charisma free zone, so maybe we could find someone more interesting... Hawley?)
https://www.stonehavenglobal.com/insights/the-next-uk-election-more-2017-than-1997
They did a MRP poll in November 2023
* I mean the "Deep State" as envisaged by Trump/QAnon
I'm going to go out on a flyer and say they'll end up doing slightly better, percentage-wise, than the polls think, and end up on 13%. And I think they get 26-29 seats.
No spoiling my vote doesn't cut it because it might be a mere mistake. A box telling them all to get fucked absolutely does
These are the Lib Dem seats
Bath
Carshalton and Wallington
Cheadle
Cheltenham
Chesham and Amersham
Chippenham
Didcot and Wantage
Eastbourne
Eastleigh
Esher and Walton
Farnham and Bordon
Frome and East Somerset
Glastonbury and Somerton
Godalming and Ash
Guildford
Hazel Grove
Henley and Thame
Honiton and Sidmouth
Kingston and Surbiton
Lewes
Melksham and Devizes
Mid Dorset and North Poole
Newton Abbot
North Cornwall
North Cotswolds
North Devon
North Dorset
North Shropshire
Oxford West and Abingdon
Richmond Park
South Cambridgeshire
South Cotswolds
South Devon
St Albans
St Ives
Sutton and Cheam
Taunton and Wellington
Tewkesbury
Thornbury and Yate
Tiverton and Minehead
Torbay
Twickenham
Wells and Mendip Hills
West Dorset
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Wimbledon
Winchester
Witney
Woking
Yeovil
Edinburgh West
Mid Dunbartonshire
North East Fife
Orkney and Shetland
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18DWPXekPxvWpe6F9c2UTX4b8aCxwT3Em/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103480920087627714998&rtpof=true&sd=true
Climate change?
I mean, you could ask the same about Biden and Trump, except they clearly don't disagree on abortion. Both Biden and Trump, after all, are American economic nationalists who want to use the power of the Federal government to increase manufacturing in the US. And now Biden has - belatedly - changed his mind on the Southern border, the difference has narrowed yet further.
But on the other hand, a quick skim doesn't seem to throw up any absolute howlers of a "no way is that happening" sort. If Ed Davey's agents did "accidentally" leave a list of their target seats behind the cistern in the gents at Westminster's third dingiest pub for someone in Labour to "accidentally" pick up, it would probably look a lot like this. And a good night for the Lib Dems is getting 45% or so in 45 seats, and naff all elsewhere. It's all about efficiency.
And if the Conservatives are going to collapse, why shouldn't our besandled chums have some of the fun?
Limiting divergence with EU rules, so lessening the amount of checks needed on goods (will Tory MPs decry this betrayal of Brexit?)
New legislation to strengthen "unfettered access" for Northern Ireland goods going to Great Britain (which means what?)
Renaming a proposed green lane - the one used for goods going from Great Britain destined for sale in Northern Ireland - to the "UK Internal Market Lane" (LOL)
A new body that could promote trade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK (spaff some public money up the wall?)
Or is it just that I got a 'first' before TSE?
:: suspicious eyes emoji ::
Labour inclined voters like Rishi better than Boris, but won’t vote for him
Cameroon Tories ditto
Boris’s first time 2019 Tories feel betrayed
Not much to separate Sunak & Sir Keir on charisma
I think the only realistic hope the Tories have is people seeing a lot of Starmer on tv being grilled about u-turns, and getting flustered/angry. It’s low key happened before and he’s never really been under the microscope from an awkward interviewer. But even that is probably not enough
The unrealistic hope is ditching Sunak, manoeuvring Boris into an unloseable seat & making him leader again. He would dominate the campaign and Labour would be put on the back foot
This is a gloriously unpredictable tournament.
Think DRC and Angola are good long shot bets, and here anything can happen.
Some great football and the VAR works without being intrusive.
If that MRP were to be believed, we would be going from a situation where the LDs got under 2% of the seats with 12% of the GB vote share in 2019, to one where they get over 8% of the seats with a reduced 11% of the vote share in 2024. Not far from a proportional result.
It would take a truely remarkable concentration of their vote to achieve 54 seats in those circumstances, enough to almost eliminate the bias of FPTP against small parties. And other evidence says that there isn't such a concentration happening to the required degree. Look at R&W's "Blue Wall" polling which contains many of their target seats - the LDs were at 24% in the latest R&W Blue Wall polling, compared to the 27% they achieved at GE 2019 on a 12% national vote share.
But that isn't going to be squeezed. Not happening.
North Devon: 15,500 Tory majority over LibDems. 5,000 Labour vote to squeeze.
Again, that is going to increase, not get squeezed.
Unless they can improve the standard, or change to operating VAR in the way it is done more successfully in international tournaments, I'm for now in the "get rid of VAR" camp, at least for everything bar offside.
In that situation sure they'd lose, but no worse and probably better than not choosing him, such is his hold on the base.
So if she is actually trying to stop Trump (even if she cannot say that), then she should stay in as long as she can afford it, because it drives him nuts.
I'd assume in reality she will try to stay in until Super Tuesday, then roll in behind him.
Then he someone managed to have the greatest presidency in US history, simultaneous to the deep state preventing him from doing even more awesome things and then rigging the election against him.
Go back to the state of the parties in local elections prior to the 1997 election: at that time, the LDs controlled pretty much all the (non-urban) councils in the South West. Now - sure - there are some islands of strength there. But they're not doing that well. (I grant you that South Somerset, home of Yeovil, is one of the areas they are doing pretty well in.)
Godspeed to her. She maybe v conservative but she isn't Trump 2.0 bat bonkers.
The two will obviously point to different elections on their leaflets come the General Election, but I have no idea whether Labour surging nationally will see them retain their place as main challengers but lose out on victory, or if the LDs will be able to capitalise based on local support and resources to sneak a few extra seats.
That points to them getting their seat numbers back into the 20s. If they do get 11% this time around, I'd reckon they'll probably end up with 18-22 seats.
I'm a little more optimistic on their ultimate vote share, and think they'll probably get something like 13%, maybe 14% on a really good day, which puts them in the 26-29 seat range.
Some scales are going to fall from eyes, so Haley might as well stay in.
Kensington also has many more constituents!
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-2ee9e509a28c24d0cda92da2f9a9b689
Note: Hyde Park doesn't actually have any people in it, so the difference is essentially symbolic.
It's all McDonnells fault really - he accepted Trump was culpable for Jan 6th but did not act, that's worse than those who did not see him as culpable.
https://x.com/halalflow/status/1752021755995025689
This is not petty political vindictiveness. It is as a result of Grand Jury charges, brought and then proved in court. Trump deserves all the tonnage of shit that is about to descend upon him.
And that is before we get on to January 6th. Where the mob he whipped up tried to cheat his way to not giving up office. Where democracy was at risk. Where people died - all for the vanity of a man who just cannot concede that he is a loser.
Deutsche Bank offered him loans and did their own due diligence on the security he put up. Valuations of illiquid real estate are always somewhat subjective. What he did isn't fraud.
The kelner article clearly answers BJO question a few threads 7 hours back, though Tbf PBers replying to John did so well enough - why this group of pollsters have lead at 14 or less, and this group pushing 20s or beyond. Kelner calls it purity v reality, best summoned up in his Opinium paragraph.
“Opinium is one company that adopts the reality approach. This is why it regularly reports lower leads than most other companies. Its new year poll for the Observer is typical. Its unadjusted “purity” figures showed Labour on 44 per cent, 20 points ahead of the Conservatives. But its “reality” adjustments—to turnout, don’t knows etc—reduced Labour’s support by three percentage points, and added the same amount to the Tories. The outcome: Labour’s lead as reported by the Observer, six points lower at 14 per cent.”
If you are looking at a 14 (that you don’t realise already “presumes what will really happen” with a Wapping 6% swing to the Conservatives) and you thinking voters actually said 14 and there’s some swingback still to come, then of course this is abysmal news if you’re Conservatives - those smaller polls are not what voters are actually saying - the actual figure are like Opiniums pure 20 point margins, is same as the other “pure figure” pollsters, only with 3 taken off Labour and added to the Tories based on “reality”.
Yet in 97 it didn’t happen Peter. The reality is, here and there you can get an election where historical precedents end up in the bin, no matter how often it had previously consistently happened - to pick those odd ones, which I insist you can do, you must at same time be more creative and wide ranging in your thinking about what is patently different in the psychological make up of each election.
I can give you two good examples, firstly, votes outside the big 3 totalled 6% in 97, and 20% or more in today’s polls. Is the 3 off labour and all of it added onto the Tories making it a reality poll, yet the 11% for Ref and 8% green are pure figures in the same poll? You expect it to be 11 and 8 in the PV? Where you tell us the Reality Margin is 14%, you’ve got an elephant in the room Peter, asking you where he fits into “reality swingback theory”. 8 off that 11 ref onto Tory, with Greens staying put, and you got yourself a 6% reality lead for Labour, likewise, keep the ref where they are and add 6 from greens to Labours reality for a new Reality of 20% deficit for Tories on election day. At this election, so unlike previous examples, You’ve got this elephant standing in the middle of your theory Peter.
Another example for Peter, “what was the reasoning for previous swingback”. In the 10 years leading up to 92 the voters trusted the Conservatives very consistently every year on economy, law and order, defence etc etc, so it wan’t what was going on in the months up to voting day that created Swingback, but the record over the previous 10 years. Which in comparison, are the voters minds in a different place today about the last 10 years, or perhaps completely opposite minded, hence we shouldn’t presume the historical swingback.
But that doesn't mean that some of the court cases don't stink of political vindictiveness. Like the hush money payments case: I mean "falsifying business records"? Come on.
And, of course, he is able to portray them all as vindictiveness, when many of his crimes are - as you note - very serious.
20x differences are not.
And whether Deutche Bank lost money is irrelevant. If you claim $100m of assets so you can borrow $20m, and it later turns out you only have $5m of assets, then you are guilty of wire fraud and material misrepresentation irrespective of whether you eventually repaid the money.
(Indeed, the lower interest rate you paid is obtaining pecuniary advantage via... errr... lying.)
But even if you take the Trump side entirely at face value, and argue there is no attempt to defraud when he submitted valuations to banks, he is still guilty of wire fraud when he made his property tax submissions.
There is a vast trail of evidence that over a period of many years, he gave very low valuations for property taxes and very high valuations on the very same properties for obtaining loans.
Fraud. On a massive scale.
Read about it in remarkable detail in the judgment when it is handed down. Then come back and shill for Trump. He'll be needing some new lawyers then. You can act for him.
Just don't expect any thanks. Or any payment.
"Matt Goodwin
@GoodwinMJ
Rishi Sunak should save his party and the country by offering the British people a referendum on reducing mass immigration. It is the only thing that would give him a chance at the looming election. Here's why"
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1751918630613225988
If you want to question why politicians deserve no respect, then Exhibit A: Donald Trump.
Having seen this (https://www.netflix.com/title/81607097), I would not be volunteering to be first.
And it is already moving the polls. Otherwise Haley wouldn't still be in the race, raising millions. Watch the vox pops. Those people voting Haley are going to vote Biden, if the alternative is Trump.
“Do you agree that Rishi really should stop the boats and that voting ‘Yes’ will magically make him capable of doing so?”
Jan. 23-25 - Morning Consult: Trump - 81% - 17% - Haley: Trump +64
Jan. 24 - Morning Consult: Trump - 81% - 18% - Haley: Trump +63
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-r/2024/national/
Jan. 26-28 - Morning Consult: Biden - 42% - 44% - Trump: Trump +2
Jan. 23-25 - Morning Consult: Biden - 42% - 44% Trump: Trump +2
Jan. 22-24 - Ipsos: Biden - 34% - 39% - Trump: Trump +5
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
This is an organization called Code Pink. It defends the internment of Uighurs. It's run by a former Chinese Communist Party member in Shanghai. He shares an office with a company dedicated to educating foreigners about the miracles that China has created on the world stage.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/05/world/europe/neville-roy-singham-china-propaganda.html
It seems extremely unlikely.
Things he is not fond of.
It is interesting how Mike has adopted his rhetorical approach. That's how propaganda works.
They disagree massively on climate change.
Biden has spent billions on developing renewable industries; Trump would actively sabotage them..
Trump is anti NATO; Biden a strong supporter.
Trump would likely abandon Taiwan.
They differ hugely on redistributive taxation; the size of the state; environmental regulation; gun control ... the list goes on.
Given his strong lead in the polls, and that it's only a month away, why demanx the party units behind him immediately ?
A possible explanation is that he wants the undisputed support of the party before more shit emerges.
I am interested to see how Justice Engoron and NY AG Letitia James address Donald Trump’s apparent unlawful $50+ million “debt parking” scheme that financial monitor Judge Barbara Jones (Ret.) smoked out. In short, when debt is forgiven it is treated as income, so wealthy people often would rather acquire the forgiven debt and “park” it somewhere and pay it down on favorable terms to avoid the immediate tax hit. When Deutsche Bank and Fortress forgave huge amounts of Trump’s debt after being sued by Trump for the disastrous Chicago skyscraper deal, it appears from the data that is now out in the public that Trump pretended that a company called Chicago Unit Acquisitions (owned 100 percent by Trump) acquired the debt and was servicing the “springing loan” with himself (Donald Trump). The financial monitor found that this $50+million loan between the Trump-owned shell company and Trump never existed so it appears that Deutsche and Fortress simply forgave the underlying debt and to avoid paying taxes on the forgiveness Trump lied and pretended the debt was being parked at his shell company in a non-existent loan with himself. I need more data to fully form my opinion that is an unlawful debt parking scheme, but it appears to have the hallmarks of one.
https://twitter.com/meiselasb/status/1751824473702141989
I don't recall anyone ever suggesting a candidate who just got over 40% of the vote drop out at this stage.
It all reinforces Trump’s message to his supporters, and even to some floating voters, that the apparatus of the State can be politicised and *they* can come for whoever they want.
Yes, the figure is high, but I can at least report from Tewkesbury that they do have a squeak here. The incumbent, Laurence Robertson, is standing down and the Yellow Peril did well in the locals.
For everyone else, it seems that those who think Trump's Trials are "nakedly politically motivated by partisan actors" might well be protecting a criminal for nakedly politically reasons.
I’m filing that under ‘somebody was smoking something good.’
Incidentally even in a very bad result for the Tories I expect them to regain North Shropshire.