Howdy, Stranger!

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

What if it’s not close ? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited September 29 in General
imageWhat if it’s not close ? – politicalbetting.com

Cards on the table, I think Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 24
    I have had a nibble at Ohio and Iowa. The latter is Walz territory.

    Not big stakes though, just reinvesting some if my winnings from the Kamala nomination.

    Oh, and first.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    With regard to Kennedy withdrawing ‘only from swing states’ I wonder how he has defined them.

    For example, will he see the usually safely Republican states of Texas and Missouri as ‘swing states?’ If not, might his presence on the ballot put further pressure on Trump on races that look set to be very tight?

    Florida should be considered a possible swing state too.

    Do we have a list yet of where he is and isn’t going to be nominated?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    I am about to doxx Luckyguy.

    Liz Truss was a better PM than Boris Johnson, says Anthony Seldon

    She may have traumatised the economy, but her predecessor debased public life, Britain’s foremost political biographer claims in new book serialised by The Times Magazine


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-was-a-better-pm-than-boris-johnson-says-anthony-seldon-p836g9lql
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p

    Poor old William Pulteney, forgotten again.

    Not only didn’t outlast a lettuce, could barely outlast a cheese soufflé.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    ydoethur said:

    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p

    Poor old William Pulteney, forgotten again.

    Not only didn’t outlast a lettuce, could barely outlast a cheese soufflé.
    Like all decent historians I do not count him as PM, at least Liz Truss managed to appoint a cabinet.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    ydoethur said:

    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p

    Poor old William Pulteney, forgotten again.

    Not only didn’t outlast a lettuce, could barely outlast a cheese soufflé.
    Like all decent historians I do not count him as PM, at least Liz Truss managed to appoint a cabinet.
    And yet he was a far better PM than Truss. He ‘never transacted one rash thing; and what is more marvellous, left as much money in the Treasury as he found in it.’
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    I wonder if Donald Trump is regretting making this election about age and mental acuity?

    https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-suffers-unintentionally-funny-meltdown-dncs-final-night-rcna167928

    He’s coming across badly compared to Biden, never mind Harris.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,125

    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p

    The article is rubbish. Truss's premiership wasn't the shortest in history - not even close. The 18th century Long Administration, under the Earl of Bath in 1746, lasted only 48 hours, not 38 days, and anyway was by some measures the best government we've ever had. As a leaflet at the time said, to the astonishment of all wise men, it never transacted one rash thing, and, even more remarkably, left as much money in the Treasury as it found there.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    Over the weekend of August 6-7, during the leadership contest, when Truss was still foreign secretary, a select group of economists had been invited to her home in Greenwich, southeast London. “You should hear from these free-market people,” she was told. “It was devised as an egg-on for Liz, to stiffen her resolve,” said Shabbir Merali, her economic adviser.

    Present at the tutorial was Jacob Rees-Mogg, hoping to be her chancellor. Did she need this turbocharging? Even some of her most ardent ideological supporters had reservations. “Their radicalism gave fresh tinder to something that was already burning too brightly within Liz,” said one. Ideas flew around the room.

    Days later, scrapping the cap on bankers’ bonuses was mentioned. “Let’s go for it!” Reducing the 45p tax rate? “Long overdue.” “How about replacing all direct taxes with a flat 20p rate of income tax?” “Great idea, Jacob.” This last proposal was nicknamed “Estonia” (a reference to a similar policy adopted there) and Rees-Mogg “estimated it would cost £41 billion”. “I’d long been attracted to the idea of flat-rate taxes,” Truss said later.

    “These guys were deadly serious,” recalled one adviser. He watched with horror as those present vied with each other to produce the most radical and outlandish ideas, none more so than Rees-Mogg. “What is the number one problem with the UK energy system?” he asked. Silence. “Not enough nuclear power,” he said, answering his own question. “We need more small reactors in the UK.” “How would you do it?” someone asked. “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show people it was safe.”

    “I was worried,” Kwarteng said later. “Liz was losing her perspective.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    On topic, thanks Nigel, I hope you are right.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    FPT
    Andy_JS said:

    "Boris Johnson: Welcome to Starmer's Britain... twinned with Orwell's 1984"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13773239/BORIS-JOHNSON-Starmer-Orwell-1984-ill.html

    That would be the Boris Johnson that effectively locked every UK citizen in their house for over a year.

    That wasn't an Orwellian nightmare.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    Interesting take on the US election @Nigelb, thanks!

    The joy and the peril of politics is that none of us knows but let's hope you're right.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    A shocking insult to both parties: Gordon Brown and skirts.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    A shocking insult to both parties: Gordon Brown and skirts.
    I'm glad you a dressed both parts of that insult.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    I mean to be fair laughing wasn't particularly appropriate in that context? And the dressing down in semi-private not an unreasonable response?

    Laughing from afar at Braverman or any of them being in high office is reasonable but not if you've chosen to work for the clowns.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864

    Over the weekend of August 6-7, during the leadership contest, when Truss was still foreign secretary, a select group of economists had been invited to her home in Greenwich, southeast London. “You should hear from these free-market people,” she was told. “It was devised as an egg-on for Liz, to stiffen her resolve,” said Shabbir Merali, her economic adviser.

    Present at the tutorial was Jacob Rees-Mogg, hoping to be her chancellor. Did she need this turbocharging? Even some of her most ardent ideological supporters had reservations. “Their radicalism gave fresh tinder to something that was already burning too brightly within Liz,” said one. Ideas flew around the room.

    Days later, scrapping the cap on bankers’ bonuses was mentioned. “Let’s go for it!” Reducing the 45p tax rate? “Long overdue.” “How about replacing all direct taxes with a flat 20p rate of income tax?” “Great idea, Jacob.” This last proposal was nicknamed “Estonia” (a reference to a similar policy adopted there) and Rees-Mogg “estimated it would cost £41 billion”. “I’d long been attracted to the idea of flat-rate taxes,” Truss said later.

    “These guys were deadly serious,” recalled one adviser. He watched with horror as those present vied with each other to produce the most radical and outlandish ideas, none more so than Rees-Mogg. “What is the number one problem with the UK energy system?” he asked. Silence. “Not enough nuclear power,” he said, answering his own question. “We need more small reactors in the UK.” “How would you do it?” someone asked. “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show people it was safe.”

    “I was worried,” Kwarteng said later. “Liz was losing her perspective.

    Mogg was right on nuclear
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,808
    So I’ve been big on the Dems for some time….

    On the one hand

    Trump just looks like he’s going through the motions. He was up for a revenge run against a fellow geriatric. Sleepy Joe. That’s been snatched from him and he doesn’t know what to do. He looks old and he looks and sounds stale.

    Project 2025 has landed as an attack. Many Americans realise the Republicans are after their right to manage their sex lives the way they see fit. Abortion, Contraception. It’s kryptonite and it’s being tied to Trump/Vance. Trump and Vance are in the becroom and it will be a big motivator for the young and women.

    But the polls... Democrats have been outperforming the polls in elections pretty much consistently during Biden’s term. I don’t know why, but it’s true. It looks like Democrats are just more motivated to vote at the moment.

    The primary. It became clear that many Repubs were protest voting against Trump’s candidacy. Haley continued to score well when not on the ballot. That’s a very high degree of dissatisfaction. Some will peg their nose and vote for Trump. But many will not, they will either not vote or vote for Harris.

    And that’s before the insurrection, Trump’s record, the felonies etc.

    On the other

    Yeah, America is deeply divided. And Trump can attack on the economy, notwithstanding that inflation has been a global post Covid phenomenon. That’s it.

    So it’s down to turnout and undecideds. Both will enormously break for Harris imho. The enthusiasm gap is palpable. And once the bandwagon starts rolling, it could turn into a blowout. Americans hate a loser. And Trump increasingly looks like a loser.

    Best bet for me: Harris to win Iowa. Not that dissimilar to the adjoining south Minnesota seat that Walz held in Congress. Has been trending R but maybe not so far that the Dems couldn’t pull it back in a good year.

    And a hail mary: Dems to win Kansas, has been edging towards them for a while and received the full impact of Republican nuttiness during Brownback’s tenure. In an utter blow out I could see this flipping. Unlikely but I’m having a couple of quid.

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,465
    Thnks for the piece, Nigel.

    On the whole I agree that there is a small but definite possibilty KH could win bigly, but there's a dearth of opportunities to profit from this. Ideally you would want a spread bet, but the generally admirable Sporting Index are very cautious with its politics markets and unlikely to chalk up their boards until much closer to the election, by which time everyone will have sussed out what is going to happen.

    Betfair isn't a lot better. The State markets offer some value but they are short of liquidity and likely to remain so for quite some time. It seems therefore that we have to just hope Donald stays competitve enough for long enough to provide some real competition, although looking at that Fox clip I should say the chances are diminishing daily.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    edited August 24
    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Similar criticisms to Starmer. The big "con" that can make a real difference to the campaign is to portray her as the fresh challenger vs Trump the old guard incumbent everyone has had enough of. That needs storytelling and passion rather than detail and she delivered it.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Similar criticisms to Starmer. The big "con" that can make a real difference to the campaign is to portray her as the fresh challenger vs Trump the old guard incumbent everyone has had enough of. That needs storytelling and passion rather than detail and she delivered it.
    I agree that there are a lot of similarities to Starmer who got away with not answering questions throughout. But doing that as the serving VP would be a clever trick indeed.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,465
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    It's the only one I'm on, and even so at modest stakes. It somehow doesn't feel as Trumpian as the others.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    If you follow politics mostly on twitter, yes, you will get into a spiral of re-enforcing views. It is not mandatory to follow politics on twitter.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    I think that shows how news reporting is no longer the global or even consistent local news story it used to be.

    My twitter/X feed has shown none of those items - literally the only "outside" story I saw was a right wing pointless and incredibly tackless attack of Walz's teenage emotional son.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,111

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    I don't think it likely but with the poll lead still only 3-4 pts at the moment, debates to come and possible polling errors, I'd have the chance a bit bigger than 23%.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    North Carolina is becoming more of a tech and knowledge economy, less Hillbilly.

    South Carolina too, with a large black vote and military too, but surely too out of reach for the Dems at present.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    She obviously doesn’t have a vote but Walz has made a big impression on my daughter’s social media repeatedly. I am not sure she could name a VP candidate before this. His daughter Hope is a natural.

    I suppose, as with all social media, it depends upon what the algorithm decides you want.
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    I mean to be fair laughing wasn't particularly appropriate in that context? And the dressing down in semi-private not an unreasonable response?

    Laughing from afar at Braverman or any of them being in high office is reasonable but not if you've chosen to work for the clowns.
    Laughing might not be the best response but surely it is a SpAd's place to give advice, it's literally their job title. Truss's inability to listen to other viewpoints seems to be a peculiar blind spot for a senior politician.

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    DM_Andy said:


    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    I mean to be fair laughing wasn't particularly appropriate in that context? And the dressing down in semi-private not an unreasonable response?

    Laughing from afar at Braverman or any of them being in high office is reasonable but not if you've chosen to work for the clowns.
    Laughing might not be the best response but surely it is a SpAd's place to give advice, it's literally their job title. Truss's inability to listen to other viewpoints seems to be a peculiar blind spot for a senior politician.

    Doesn't it depend both how advice is delivered and how senior the advisor is? I suspect a junior adviser laughing at a PMs proposal for home secretary would rile pretty much every PM we have ever had. The correct phrasing might be more like appointing Suella would be a very brave decision indeed Prime Minister.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,422
    Oven-ready deal? New Brexit arrangements cause problems in NI: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9zrzyr2y9o
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    It is literally designed to take people down into re-enforcing spirals to enable Twitter to sell adverts. That is the whole point of the site. Users need to wise up.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,125
    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    edited August 24
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    it is, but the people who are getting news on those lines are probably people who are already voting for Trump anyway. It's whether it cut through to Swing voters that we need to know, and we will only get that with the opinion polls next week.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    "...the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz"

    My Twitter (the 'For You' section, not the 'following' section seems to be filled with people condemning the mocking of the children. The mocking comments are not just nasty; they play badly with the public as well.

    With social media, and Twitter, the algorithm is king. It largely decides what you see. And I don't for one moment believe that what Twitter and Musky Baby has open-sourced is the algorithm they use, and especially the algorithm they now use.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,153
    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    I think that even if there is no post convention bounce there are still two purposes you could say they serve. Firstly, they put your party into the news cycle in a positive way, which at least denies the space to your opponent, if nothing else. Secondly they motivate your base to start on the hard work of phone banking, canvassing, leafletting and so on (and to donate more money).
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807

    I am about to doxx Luckyguy.

    Liz Truss was a better PM than Boris Johnson, says Anthony Seldon

    She may have traumatised the economy, but her predecessor debased public life, Britain’s foremost political biographer claims in new book serialised by The Times Magazine


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-was-a-better-pm-than-boris-johnson-says-anthony-seldon-p836g9lql

    I am not a particular fan of Anthony Seldon. Big Sunk-botherer.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
    I am not nearly as confident as you. But Nigel’s thread header does make a good point. Trump’s main USP is he is a winner, despite losing in 2020. If Harris does get that bounce things could unravel for him in a major way and some states, such as Florida, then become good bets. Too many maybes for me though.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,882
    edited August 24
    Good morning everyone, and thank you for the header, N-n-Nigel.

    Interesting information on Haley voters pivoting to Harris, but I'm afraid I can't recall where I saw it.

    Domestic pleasures for a Saturday

    I did my first full garden waste bin for a couple of years this morning, having successfully pruned and shredded some large shrubs.

    More energy is returning - now it's time for an autumn Spring Clean, and to reacquaint myself with the hedge trimmers and the loppers, and I hope to find some autumn fruit this year in the jungle.

    And it's time to get a stone man in to repair the 5-6m of 150 year old stone wall that needs a rebuild. That sounds a little expensive.

    I seem finally to be breaking even on the solar revenue vs energy bills that I have been chipping away at for nearly a decade. Checking the numbers 12 months gas / elec is just under £1200 charged including exports to Octopus, balance increased by £400 over the year, and now that the new neighbours have crown lifted their pair of listed trees once the panels are cleaned I should get that £800 back from the feed in tariff.

    Have a good day everyone.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,153
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    it is, but the people who are getting news on those lines are probably people who are already voting for Trump anyway. It's whether it cut through to Swing voters that we need to know, and we will only get that with the opinion polls next week.
    Mmm, presumably the people Harris most needs to get across to (undecided voters who don't really want to have to interact with politics at all) will have social media feeds with basically no political content on either side. The algorithm may have taken them down other non political rabbit holes, but they've probably self selected out of seeing either side's stuff to the extent they can.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,125
    edited August 24
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Her problem has in any case not really been set-piece speeches to ultra-friendly audiences. It's in person interviews where she has to think on her feet. That's why she hasn't given one yet during the campaign - bizarrely and I think uniquely for a sitting Vice President and Presidential candidate in modern times.

    If she were facing anybody except Donald Trump I don't think she'd have a prayer.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    edited August 24
    HYUFD said:

    Over the weekend of August 6-7, during the leadership contest, when Truss was still foreign secretary, a select group of economists had been invited to her home in Greenwich, southeast London. “You should hear from these free-market people,” she was told. “It was devised as an egg-on for Liz, to stiffen her resolve,” said Shabbir Merali, her economic adviser.

    Present at the tutorial was Jacob Rees-Mogg, hoping to be her chancellor. Did she need this turbocharging? Even some of her most ardent ideological supporters had reservations. “Their radicalism gave fresh tinder to something that was already burning too brightly within Liz,” said one. Ideas flew around the room.

    Days later, scrapping the cap on bankers’ bonuses was mentioned. “Let’s go for it!” Reducing the 45p tax rate? “Long overdue.” “How about replacing all direct taxes with a flat 20p rate of income tax?” “Great idea, Jacob.” This last proposal was nicknamed “Estonia” (a reference to a similar policy adopted there) and Rees-Mogg “estimated it would cost £41 billion”. “I’d long been attracted to the idea of flat-rate taxes,” Truss said later.

    “These guys were deadly serious,” recalled one adviser. He watched with horror as those present vied with each other to produce the most radical and outlandish ideas, none more so than Rees-Mogg. “What is the number one problem with the UK energy system?” he asked. Silence. “Not enough nuclear power,” he said, answering his own question. “We need more small reactors in the UK.” “How would you do it?” someone asked. “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show people it was safe.”

    “I was worried,” Kwarteng said later. “Liz was losing her perspective.

    Mogg was right on nuclear
    As he is on the 45p changes and the banker's bonus changes. And the idea that the PM should be somehow protected from hearing anything deemed 'too radical' is grotesquely Orwellian.

    And also, when did that fuckwit Kwarteng become this Jiminy Cricket style observer/voice of reason within the Truss administration? It was him that dropped the minibudget, declared it was just the beginning, then buggered off to America whilst the crisis enveloped the Government. Now he makes a living going around slagging off Truss. Ghastly man.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,422
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    But fewer and fewer from Twitter: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/26/twitter-usage-in-us-fallen-by-a-fifth-since-elon-musks-takeover
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    One of its most negative aspects must be driving down turnout. In so many states it must feel that there’s simply no point in voting. That, to me, defeats the main purpose of a directly elected president rather than an indirectly elected PM. It’s interesting to think about how a Presidential election campaign would look if every counted.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    it is, but the people who are getting news on those lines are probably people who are already voting for Trump anyway. It's whether it cut through to Swing voters that we need to know, and we will only get that with the opinion polls next week.
    I thought this poll interesting, particularly with Harris ahead already.

    "Harris has a larger pool of voters that say they could see themselves voting for her instead of their current choice (25%)

    Trump's pool of potential voters is slightly smaller (20%)"

    https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1827184543259844752?t=HTnhyjv-G4BUInvPyoWhCw&s=19
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    But fewer and fewer from Twitter: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/26/twitter-usage-in-us-fallen-by-a-fifth-since-elon-musks-takeover
    That cannot possibly be correct. Musky Baby's been telling everyone how well Twitter's been doing since his takeover - whilst also suing companies for not advertising on the platform.... ;)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    edited August 24
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
    I am not nearly as confident as you. But Nigel’s thread header does make a good point. Trump’s main USP is he is a winner, despite losing in 2020. If Harris does get that bounce things could unravel for him in a major way and some states, such as Florida, then become good bets. Too many maybes for me though.
    Missouri might be one to watch. Obama missed by a whisker in 2008 and although it has trended strongly Republican since it has a ballot on abortion and a Senator who makes Vance look like a moderate.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,422
    Fishing said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Her problem has in any case not really been set-piece speeches to ultra-friendly audiences. It's in person interviews where she has to think on her feet. That's why she hasn't given one yet during the campaign - bizarrely and I think uniquely for a sitting Vice President and Presidential candidate in modern times.

    If she were facing anybody except Donald Trump I don't think she'd have a prayer.
    If the Republicans had chosen another candidate, they would be doing better, sure. But they didn’t . They tied themselves to Trump. That Republican politicians were too craven to dump Trump is a stain on the party it will take a very long time to clean up.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236

    I am about to doxx Luckyguy.

    Liz Truss was a better PM than Boris Johnson, says Anthony Seldon

    She may have traumatised the economy, but her predecessor debased public life, Britain’s foremost political biographer claims in new book serialised by The Times Magazine


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-was-a-better-pm-than-boris-johnson-says-anthony-seldon-p836g9lql

    Tricky choice: who was the worse prime minister? Johnson or Truss,?

    And people on here complain about Starmer and means testing of Winter Fuel Payment...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    Fishing said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Her problem has in any case not really been set-piece speeches to ultra-friendly audiences. It's in person interviews where she has to think on her feet. That's why she hasn't given one yet during the campaign - bizarrely and I think uniquely for a sitting Vice President and Presidential candidate in modern times.

    If she were facing anybody except Donald Trump I don't think she'd have a prayer.
    If the Republicans had chosen another candidate, they would be doing better, sure. But they didn’t . They tied themselves to Trump. That Republican politicians were too craven to dump Trump is a stain on the party it will take a very long time to clean up.
    Tbf, it wasn't the politicians as much as the supporters.

    There come a moment when every revolution eats its own children. I think the Tea Party has hit that moment by choosing a 78 year old in rapid decline with multiple criminal convictions and a track record of losing as their standard bearer.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 24
    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    One of its most negative aspects must be driving down turnout. In so many states it must feel that there’s simply no point in voting. That, to me, defeats the main purpose of a directly elected president rather than an indirectly elected PM. It’s interesting to think about how a Presidential election campaign would look if every counted.
    Or even if all states adopted the Nebraska and Maine model of dividing the votes by electoral districts.

    This is the 2020 Potus election by congressional district.


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: some wind and rain. Passing's difficult but a safety car is eminently possible, so things may be tricky to predict. At the moment, ok with having an early bet on Hamilton each way for the win. Qualifying's looking like a five horse race.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    One of its most negative aspects must be driving down turnout. In so many states it must feel that there’s simply no point in voting. That, to me, defeats the main purpose of a directly elected president rather than an indirectly elected PM. It’s interesting to think about how a Presidential election campaign would look if every counted.
    Or even if all states adopted the Nebraska and Maine model of dividing the votes by electoral districts.

    Maine is also of course now using a form of (whisper it) AV as well...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    The most interesting bit in that piece is Truss' conviction she would lose the following election, would not try to do anything that would help the Tories win the election, and just use the two years for her personal agenda. In the end she got forty days, of which ten were a timeout for the Queen's death
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    Fishing said:

    Worth a read.

    The downfall of Liz Truss — by those who were there

    Her premiership was the shortest and most chaotic in British history. In his new book, Anthony Seldon talks to the key aides, allies and civil servants who witnessed the arrogance, the rows, the tears and the meltdowns


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/liz-truss-downfall-those-who-were-there-dxbrqwv3p

    The article is rubbish. Truss's premiership wasn't the shortest in history - not even close. The 18th century Long Administration, under the Earl of Bath in 1746, lasted only 48 hours, not 38 days, and anyway was by some measures the best government we've ever had. As a leaflet at the time said, to the astonishment of all wise men, it never transacted one rash thing, and, even more remarkably, left as much money in the Treasury as it found there.
    I reckon I could do it for 48 hours. Maybe we all could.

    You could probably stay up for the whole thing and then jack it in and go for a nice long sleep after, whilst Seldon wrote a (very) short book about it.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    It’s close because the competency or even identity of the candidates is irrelevant. The USA is as divided as medieval Italy was between Guelphs and Ghibellines or late 19th century France was between Drefusards and Anti-Drefusards. The Guelphs didn’t care who the pope was to support the papacy and the Ghibellines had little mind who the Emperor was - ditto Dems and Reps with their respective candidates.

    The division is so entrenched it’s a matter of (voter) identity and the election hinges on a few thousand voters in a few states who haven’t chosen a side. It’s always going to be close.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    Having thought carefully about another country this morning I have concluded that the answer is cake and coffee for me, right now. Laters.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
    I am not nearly as confident as you. But Nigel’s thread header does make a good point. Trump’s main USP is he is a winner, despite losing in 2020. If Harris does get that bounce things could unravel for him in a major way and some states, such as Florida, then become good bets. Too many maybes for me though.
    The spectre of Trump is he's never lost against anyone except Biden. It's mad, always has been, but there you go.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
    I am not nearly as confident as you. But Nigel’s thread header does make a good point. Trump’s main USP is he is a winner, despite losing in 2020. If Harris does get that bounce things could unravel for him in a major way and some states, such as Florida, then become good bets. Too many maybes for me though.
    The spectre of Trump is he's never lost against anyone except Biden. It's mad, always has been, but there you go.
    Though he has never won against anyone but Clinton.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668

    Thnks for the piece, Nigel.

    On the whole I agree that there is a small but definite possibilty KH could win bigly, but there's a dearth of opportunities to profit from this. Ideally you would want a spread bet, but the generally admirable Sporting Index are very cautious with its politics markets and unlikely to chalk up their boards until much closer to the election, by which time everyone will have sussed out what is going to happen.

    Betfair isn't a lot better. The State markets offer some value but they are short of liquidity and likely to remain so for quite some time. It seems therefore that we have to just hope Donald stays competitve enough for long enough to provide some real competition, although looking at that Fox clip I should say the chances are diminishing daily.

    I have to agree, Peter.

    The markets are poor this time round.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    On topic, I think Harris is Hillary Clinton with the enthusiasm but not much more.

    At present, I expect a narrow win as she'll campaign in the right places and smile, but this isn't going to be an Obama, (Bill) Clinton or Regan landslide.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    It's no different from how we elect a prime minister.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:

    It remains close. Harris is ahead in the popular vote in polls by a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton or Biden led Trump and that gap likely narrows further after RFK Jr dropped out.

    The swing states remain close with Trump ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada on average and Harris ahead in Wisconsin and Michigan on average and Pennsylvania and Arizona tied. Ohio is comfortably Trump still in most polls, even more so than Florida

    The fact North Carolina is even on that list is a triumph for Harris and shows she has broadened the playing field. Of the ones that Nigel lists in his header that looks the most interesting.
    One reason North Carolina is on that list is the Republicans have chosen a medieval candidate for Governor.

    "Robinson has promoted various far-right conspiracy theories, engaged in Holocaust denial,[2][3] denied sexual assault allegations against various prominent figures,[4] and has often made inflammatory anti-LGBT,[5][6][7] antisemitic,[8] racist,[9] anti-atheist,[10] and Islamophobic statements.[6][11] He opined in 2023 that abortion should be completely outlawed in North Carolina, despite his paying for an abortion in the 1980s.[12]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Robinson_(American_politician)

    Harris will very likely win North Carolina. Its 16 EC votes largely negate the impact of Nevada and Arizona combined (6 and 11 respectively).

    Although I expect her to win both too.

    Florida should be a trading bet too. There will be some upcoming close polls. It lkely goes into the election as Toss Up.
    I am not nearly as confident as you. But Nigel’s thread header does make a good point. Trump’s main USP is he is a winner, despite losing in 2020. If Harris does get that bounce things could unravel for him in a major way and some states, such as Florida, then become good bets. Too many maybes for me though.
    The spectre of Trump is he's never lost against anyone except Biden. It's mad, always has been, but there you go.
    Though he has never won against anyone but Clinton.
    Not true. Trump has won against every Republican alternative, including Nikki Haley that people think would beat Harris hands down
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    One of its most negative aspects must be driving down turnout. In so many states it must feel that there’s simply no point in voting. That, to me, defeats the main purpose of a directly elected president rather than an indirectly elected PM. It’s interesting to think about how a Presidential election campaign would look if every counted.
    It cannot help with turnout, but all states do have Congressional and other elections too, as well as State and local elections, as well as referendums.

  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    DavidL said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    One of its most negative aspects must be driving down turnout. In so many states it must feel that there’s simply no point in voting. That, to me, defeats the main purpose of a directly elected president rather than an indirectly elected PM. It’s interesting to think about how a Presidential election campaign would look if every counted.
    I rather suspect that instead of 95% of the campaigning being in swing states, it would be in the 10 largest metropolitan areas.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,944
    Driver said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    It's no different from how we elect a prime minister.
    We don't elect a pm.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    That tells us a great deal about who you follow on Twitter, and yet remarkably little about the Democratic convention.
    Worth remembering that an awful lot of people will get all their news from social media...
    It is literally designed to take people down into re-enforcing spirals to enable Twitter to sell adverts. That is the whole point of the site. Users need to wise up.
    That’s the whole point of social media suggestion algorithms.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,944

    Driver said:

    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    It's no different from how we elect a prime minister.
    We don't elect a pm.
    I was voting for an MP not a pm.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    Good Mogg interview with David Davis on the extradition issues raised (not for the first time) by the Mike Lynch case.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-RVFW9Qe7Gs
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    HYUFD said:

    Over the weekend of August 6-7, during the leadership contest, when Truss was still foreign secretary, a select group of economists had been invited to her home in Greenwich, southeast London. “You should hear from these free-market people,” she was told. “It was devised as an egg-on for Liz, to stiffen her resolve,” said Shabbir Merali, her economic adviser.

    Present at the tutorial was Jacob Rees-Mogg, hoping to be her chancellor. Did she need this turbocharging? Even some of her most ardent ideological supporters had reservations. “Their radicalism gave fresh tinder to something that was already burning too brightly within Liz,” said one. Ideas flew around the room.

    Days later, scrapping the cap on bankers’ bonuses was mentioned. “Let’s go for it!” Reducing the 45p tax rate? “Long overdue.” “How about replacing all direct taxes with a flat 20p rate of income tax?” “Great idea, Jacob.” This last proposal was nicknamed “Estonia” (a reference to a similar policy adopted there) and Rees-Mogg “estimated it would cost £41 billion”. “I’d long been attracted to the idea of flat-rate taxes,” Truss said later.

    “These guys were deadly serious,” recalled one adviser. He watched with horror as those present vied with each other to produce the most radical and outlandish ideas, none more so than Rees-Mogg. “What is the number one problem with the UK energy system?” he asked. Silence. “Not enough nuclear power,” he said, answering his own question. “We need more small reactors in the UK.” “How would you do it?” someone asked. “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show people it was safe.”

    “I was worried,” Kwarteng said later. “Liz was losing her perspective.

    Mogg was right on nuclear
    I'm not aware of Mogg being right on anything, including on nuclear, per the quote. If Truss relied on him as her main advisor, her political demise was entirely deserved.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    OT

    Yes. But I would caution that the extreme resilience of the MAGA bubble makes betting risky.

    Many people have been outlasted by irrational markets.

    So far the 45% or so Trump vote is remarkably solid.

    He is an utterly ludicrous candidate, rationally. If you made up his story so far, an editor would class it as magic realism. Of a very dark kind.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    FPT...

    nico679 said:

    Let’s be blunt if Labour would have come up with this policy before the election they’d have been lucky to get a majority . Whether people like it or not pensioners are ruthless and will punish any party that they feel has shortchanged them.

    Who in their wisdom at the Treasury thought this WFA policy was a good idea.

    I suspect if it was in the manifesto it would have been a May 'dementia tax' moment half way through campaign.

    Reversed under orders from Sir K and then 'nothing has changed' etc etc.

    I guess somewhere in Reeves inner office they think this is a win and the "right thing to do" but...
    Obviously we'll never know on the counterfactual, but I seriously doubt it would have done anything more than turn a huge landslide into a large win - and said large win would have left SKS in a far better position now because he could say "it was in the manifesto and people voted for it".
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173

    Thnks for the piece, Nigel.

    On the whole I agree that there is a small but definite possibilty KH could win bigly, but there's a dearth of opportunities to profit from this. Ideally you would want a spread bet, but the generally admirable Sporting Index are very cautious with its politics markets and unlikely to chalk up their boards until much closer to the election, by which time everyone will have sussed out what is going to happen.

    Betfair isn't a lot better. The State markets offer some value but they are short of liquidity and likely to remain so for quite some time. It seems therefore that we have to just hope Donald stays competitve enough for long enough to provide some real competition, although looking at that Fox clip I should say the chances are diminishing daily.

    I'd agree with that.
    One of the motivations for the header was, in a small way, to try to encourage a bit more activity.

    But there's a couple of months to go, and a lot of stuff still to happen.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807

    OT

    Yes. But I would caution that the extreme resilience of the MAGA bubble makes betting risky.

    Many people have been outlasted by irrational markets.

    So far the 45% or so Trump vote is remarkably solid.

    He is an utterly ludicrous candidate, rationally. If you made up his story so far, an editor would class it as magic realism. Of a very dark kind.

    It is a well written and argued thread. But basically it's what Nigel wants to happen presented as what he suggests could happen.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    DougSeal said:

    It’s close because the competency or even identity of the candidates is irrelevant. The USA is as divided as medieval Italy was between Guelphs and Ghibellines or late 19th century France was between Drefusards and Anti-Drefusards. The Guelphs didn’t care who the pope was to support the papacy and the Ghibellines had little mind who the Emperor was - ditto Dems and Reps with their respective candidates.

    The division is so entrenched it’s a matter of (voter) identity and the election hinges on a few thousand voters in a few states who haven’t chosen a side. It’s always going to be close.

    I think more to do with getting turnout rather than switchers, which is where the enthusiasm thing comes in.

    In particular new voter registrations are very weighted to women, a Kamala demographic.

    https://x.com/tbonier/status/1827100342179524692?t=cieStGqi098RQnB0kFTwJg&s=19
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    edited August 24

    On topic, I think Harris is Hillary Clinton with the enthusiasm but not much more.

    At present, I expect a narrow win as she'll campaign in the right places and smile, but this isn't going to be an Obama, (Bill) Clinton or Regan landslide.

    We'll see in, due course.
    The header isn't a prediction about that - it's a what if.

    But the evidence of the last month is thar Harris is, perhaps, a far smarter politician than she'd previously been given credit for.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Her problem has in any case not really been set-piece speeches to ultra-friendly audiences. It's in person interviews where she has to think on her feet. That's why she hasn't given one yet during the campaign - bizarrely and I think uniquely for a sitting Vice President and Presidential candidate in modern times.

    If she were facing anybody except Donald Trump I don't think she'd have a prayer.
    If the Republicans had chosen another candidate, they would be doing better, sure. But they didn’t . They tied themselves to Trump. That Republican politicians were too craven to dump Trump is a stain on the party it will take a very long time to clean up.
    Tbf, it wasn't the politicians as much as the supporters.

    There come a moment when every revolution eats its own children. I think the Tea Party has hit that moment by choosing a 78 year old in rapid decline with multiple criminal convictions and a track record of losing as their standard bearer.
    The first Trump presidential run started with taking over the Republican Party against the wishes of much of its “grey men”. Since then, nearly everyone not MAGA has been purged from the upper echelons.

    It’s the Trump Party, now.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,932
    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone, and thank you for the header, N-n-Nigel.

    Interesting information on Haley voters pivoting to Harris, but I'm afraid I can't recall where I saw it.

    Domestic pleasures for a Saturday

    I did my first full garden waste bin for a couple of years this morning, having successfully pruned and shredded some large shrubs.

    More energy is returning - now it's time for an autumn Spring Clean, and to reacquaint myself with the hedge trimmers and the loppers, and I hope to find some autumn fruit this year in the jungle.

    And it's time to get a stone man in to repair the 5-6m of 150 year old stone wall that needs a rebuild. That sounds a little expensive.

    I seem finally to be breaking even on the solar revenue vs energy bills that I have been chipping away at for nearly a decade. Checking the numbers 12 months gas / elec is just under £1200 charged including exports to Octopus, balance increased by £400 over the year, and now that the new neighbours have crown lifted their pair of listed trees once the panels are cleaned I should get that £800 back from the feed in tariff.

    Have a good day everyone.

    Haley Voters 4 Harris (HV4H)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIiPhWQWINQ
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,585
    Fishing said:

    Ratters said:

    On the contrarian what if not close, I don't think Trump should be quite as long as 4.2 to win the popular vote.

    The Republicans last won the popular vote in 2004.

    Prior to that it was 1988.

    I don't see that conditions are right for Trump to win the most votes this time, even if he may get the most votes in the right places.
    The Electoral College really is about the most moronic system in the democratic world.
    Having Executive Presidents in the first place is the moronic idea.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    Candidates are currently absolutely level pegging on bf. 2.04 back 2.06 lay
  • TresTres Posts: 2,723

    I did allude to these stories, she was just Gordon Brown in a skirt.

    Truss was continuing to change inwardly, according to those who had known her for several years, becoming tetchier, more distrustful and imperious. Never comfortable with challenge, she was now even more intolerant and suspicious of those who queried her judgment.

    An illustration came when the possibility of Suella Braverman as home secretary arose in conversation. “Surely not,” said one of her team, bursting out laughing. Truss marched the aide into the garden. “It’s not your place to offer advice on who I’m going to have in my cabinet. You’re lucky to be on the team. Stay in your lane,” she shouted.

    People noticed that her trait of humiliating her team in front of others became more pronounced. “She couldn’t abide any contention. It was either all in with her or all out. A very peculiar personality type,” said an aide.

    I mean to be fair laughing wasn't particularly appropriate in that context? And the dressing down in semi-private not an unreasonable response?

    Laughing from afar at Braverman or any of them being in high office is reasonable but not if you've chosen to work for the clowns.
    The tory party is only being kept afloat by those still laughing at the clowns. If they walk away the party will be out of power for a generation.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,990
    Anecdata alert so make of it what you will

    I had a friend over from Louisiana in july but talk to them most days, she is a republican voter. She thinks Harris is useless, she also doesn't have time for trump. However the project 2025 stuff has brought her to decide that she has to vote democrat this election....in her words "my daughter is 14....I don't want her growing up in a country that's governed the way the project 2025 people think it should be"
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,286
    edited August 24

    On topic, I think Harris is Hillary Clinton with the enthusiasm but not much more.

    At present, I expect a narrow win as she'll campaign in the right places and smile, but this isn't going to be an Obama, (Bill) Clinton or Regan landslide.

    Agreed. There is a narrative being pushed by some that she is something like an Obama or Clinton but I think that is almost exclusively driven by the desire to stop Trump, rather than Harris being inspirational.

    Thanks for the header Nigelb. I can't really see evidence that it won't be close, but agree on the lack of betting opportunities.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Heathener said:

    A brief and nowadays very rare visit to this forum to add my opinion.

    I also don’t think this will be close @Nigelb

    Harris has the Big Mo. She’s affable, youthful, and offers a future.

    However, this may be wishful thinking. Just because I think she’s the obvious sensible choice doesn’t mean middle America will.

    Back home, two things.

    First, mega rich Anthony Seldon doesn’t think Truss was so bad. Doesn’t have a knife-edge mortgage or a budget to watch.

    Second, I have buyer’s remorse. I kind of expected it, just not on Day 2. Okay, so Labour are better than the Conservatives but jeez they have disappointed. ‘Country first’ just = profoundly unprincipled.

    Will that help the tories? Not if they choose Badenoch, which they probably will because the decaying moribund membership are hellbent on taking their party with them to their imminent graves.

    And there’s the assessment from the lady who first brought you news of the Labour landslide.

    Have a nice weekend :)

    xx

    Where’s the “unprincipled” bit?

    I don’t like Labour especially. But Starmer & Co. haven’t done much yet.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,122

    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    Nate Silver really rated her speech which is unusual for him whilst pointing out speeches often don't move polls much if at all.

    "I thought this was an excellent speech, delivered by someone who’s become a pretty good — maybe even very good — politician."
    To be honest I didn’t as I said last night. Far too many generalities, far too few specifics. This has been picked up by a lot of the right wing media. The general line is we don’t know what a President Harris would do. And then, of course, they fantasise to fill the void.


    In fairness to her she has had very little time to flesh out a program. But she needs to get more specific.
    Her problem has in any case not really been set-piece speeches to ultra-friendly audiences. It's in person interviews where she has to think on her feet. That's why she hasn't given one yet during the campaign - bizarrely and I think uniquely for a sitting Vice President and Presidential candidate in modern times.

    If she were facing anybody except Donald Trump I don't think she'd have a prayer.
    If the Republicans had chosen another candidate, they would be doing better, sure. But they didn’t . They tied themselves to Trump. That Republican politicians were too craven to dump Trump is a stain on the party it will take a very long time to clean up.
    Tbf, it wasn't the politicians as much as the supporters.

    There come a moment when every revolution eats its own children. I think the Tea Party has hit that moment by choosing a 78 year old in rapid decline with multiple criminal convictions and a track record of losing as their standard bearer.
    The first Trump presidential run started with taking over the Republican Party against the wishes of much of its “grey men”. Since then, nearly everyone not MAGA has been purged from the upper echelons.

    It’s the Trump Party, now.
    Somewhat similar to the UK Conservatives, a clique previously considered extreme right takes control and then after winning in 2016 discovers that the consequences of their policies are extremely divisive and ultimately very unpopular. They then double down on their extremist and largely unworkable agenda and face electoral obliteration in 2024...
  • TresTres Posts: 2,723
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    I am hoping that Harris gets a post Convention bounce. If she doesn’t then the parties will have to decide if the current razzmatazz conventions have any purpose whatsoever. She showed a party that was united, powerful and articulate speakers and supported by celebrities and musicians alike. I don’t think it could have gone any better.

    Most of the swing states are within 1% or so for Trump or Harris. That’s far too close for comfort. Harris needs a boost of 3-4 percentage points to be comfortable. Right now she isn’t.

    My experience of the democrat convention has been on twitter, or whatever it is called now. All I can see is disaster: massive gaza protests, antifa burning the american flag, mobile abortion on demand clinics, it looks like a total circus. The one thing that I thought was particularly off putting in this continual flow of MAGA propoganda, was the mocking of the children/step children of Harris/Walz.

    I just don't know objectively how this went from a betting perspective because the usual metrics (ie how did the speech go?) seem to be way out of date and completely irrellevant now, people just see what they want to find.

    You are in a bubble. Safe yourself before you go completely round the twist.
This discussion has been closed.