Howdy, Stranger!

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

Inevitability, even the MRP says it is too close to call – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,046
edited September 27 in General
Inevitability, even the MRP says it is too close to call – politicalbetting.com

Our new U.S. presidential election MRP just dropped ?Harris 256Trump 235 – Tossups 47You can explore the data and build your own projections at https://t.co/WEBsYQeS21, and follow @YouGovAmerica for all our latest data from the White House race https://t.co/nLzoRKTuUI

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,603
    edited September 27
    One thing that has puzzled me about recent polling is that it seems to show Georgia as a likely Dem hold and Arizona as a Republican gain.

    Yes, I know immigration, but otherwise you would expect it to be the other way around.

    It does underline the huge uncertainty in this election, which is very bad for everyone given one of the candidates is, to quote Sergey Witte, not fit to run a village post office.

    Edit - but yes, Harris is clearly going to win the popular vote. But so would Biden have done. Heck, even H Clinton and Gore did that.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957
    Way much closer than it should be.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128
    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957
    ydoethur said:

    One thing that has puzzled me about recent polling is that it seems to show Georgia as a likely Dem hold and Arizona as a Republican gain.

    Yes, I know immigration, but otherwise you would expect it to be the other way around.

    It does underline the huge uncertainty in this election, which is very bad for everyone given one of the candidates is, to quote Sergey Witte, not fit to run a village post office.

    Edit - but yes, Harris is clearly going to win the popular vote. But so would Biden have done. Heck, even H Clinton and Gore did that.

    Georgia is a state of two halves. Heavily Democrat cities surrounded by heavily Republican hinterland. The two halves are about equal in population. The key is who can get their vote out, or prevent the other side from doing so.
  • She's going to shit her pants when she hears about the toxic atmosphere her husband and his party come out with.

    Melania Trump has blamed the Democrats and mainstream media for "fuelling a toxic atmosphere" and empowering those who "want to do harm" to her husband

    https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1839555221162246609
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128
    Full disclosure: I'm doing the same as TSE on Harris winning the popular vote.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,596
    Vanilla seems to be back to front today ?

    New comments are appearing at the top and, for me, they have always appeared at the bottom.
  • Full disclosure: I'm doing the same as TSE on Harris winning the popular vote.

    I'm on Trump on that market. Outperformed polling previously. Incumbents struggling generally. Potential for vote counting shenanigans. Most importantly just a 4% gap with 6 weeks to go makes it closer than 1.28 imo. In at better rates but not tempted to close.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    The suggestion a New York real estate developer is offering anyone in the Rust Belt anything should be laughable but unfortunately isn't.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,603
    FF43 said:

    ydoethur said:

    One thing that has puzzled me about recent polling is that it seems to show Georgia as a likely Dem hold and Arizona as a Republican gain.

    Yes, I know immigration, but otherwise you would expect it to be the other way around.

    It does underline the huge uncertainty in this election, which is very bad for everyone given one of the candidates is, to quote Sergey Witte, not fit to run a village post office.

    Edit - but yes, Harris is clearly going to win the popular vote. But so would Biden have done. Heck, even H Clinton and Gore did that.

    Georgia is a state of two halves. Heavily Democrat cities surrounded by heavily Republican hinterland. The two halves are about equal in population. The key is who can get their vote out, or prevent the other side from doing so.
    Yes, that is true, but it also applies to Arizona and there are several more obvious reasons to drive turnout in Democratic target groups there.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128

    She's going to shit her pants when she hears about the toxic atmosphere her husband and his party come out with.

    Melania Trump has blamed the Democrats and mainstream media for "fuelling a toxic atmosphere" and empowering those who "want to do harm" to her husband

    https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1839555221162246609

    Those two actually still together?
  • She's going to shit her pants when she hears about the toxic atmosphere her husband and his party come out with.

    Melania Trump has blamed the Democrats and mainstream media for "fuelling a toxic atmosphere" and empowering those who "want to do harm" to her husband

    https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1839555221162246609

    Trump's schtick on Melania's book was quite funny, along the lines of: You should buy it. She says lots of nice things about me. I've not actually read it. If it doesn't say nice things about me, don't buy it.
  • Taz said:

    Vanilla seems to be back to front today ?

    New comments are appearing at the top and, for me, they have always appeared at the bottom.

    Still at the bottom here.
  • She's going to shit her pants when she hears about the toxic atmosphere her husband and his party come out with.

    Melania Trump has blamed the Democrats and mainstream media for "fuelling a toxic atmosphere" and empowering those who "want to do harm" to her husband

    https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1839555221162246609

    She probably won't but just in case fortunately her husband wears adult diapers so she can just borrow some of those.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    That's simply not true.
    Biden has spent much of his presidency in bringing back manufacturing, very much concentrated in those states.

    It's reflected in the VP picks of both slates; the revival of Democrats in contending for and winning state governments; and in much if the infrastructure spending bill too.

    And even the economic dominance of the east and west coasts is beginning to be challenged by states like Texas.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,724
    Quite likely. When I was in Michigan recently, was being carpetted by Kamala Harris ads and none for Trump. She must be outspending him massively.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    That's simply not true.
    Biden has spent much of his presidency in bringing back manufacturing, very much concentrated in those states.

    It's reflected in the VP picks of both slates; the revival of Democrats in contending for and winning state governments; and in much if the infrastructure spending bill too.

    And even the economic dominance of the east and west coasts is beginning to be challenged by states like Texas.
    I see you've responded to what you imagined I said and not to what I actually said.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734
    FF43 said:

    ydoethur said:

    One thing that has puzzled me about recent polling is that it seems to show Georgia as a likely Dem hold and Arizona as a Republican gain.

    Yes, I know immigration, but otherwise you would expect it to be the other way around.

    It does underline the huge uncertainty in this election, which is very bad for everyone given one of the candidates is, to quote Sergey Witte, not fit to run a village post office.

    Edit - but yes, Harris is clearly going to win the popular vote. But so would Biden have done. Heck, even H Clinton and Gore did that.

    Georgia is a state of two halves. Heavily Democrat cities surrounded by heavily Republican hinterland. The two halves are about equal in population. The key is who can get their vote out, or prevent the other side from doing so.
    The cultural divide between city and countryside is a phenomenon not exactly unique to the US.

    And recently Democrats have shown more interest in campaigning in rural areas - see for example Elissa Slotkin (who is now running for the Michigan Senate seat).
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,206
    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,245
    SMukesh said:

    Quite likely. When I was in Michigan recently, was being carpetted by Kamala Harris ads and none for Trump. She must be outspending him massively.

    This is the consideration that I haven't seen being picked up on here. As we enter the business end of the campaign, Trump is going to be massively outgunned on advertising.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,450

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    I've got f'all idea who is going to win. If this was a sane presidential process where people directly elect the president, then I'd say it's narrowly towards Harris.

    But the electoral college mucks everything up. Its complexities make it pretty much impossible for anyone to have a firm idea of what is going to happen. It's all reading tea leaves.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,245

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
  • eekeek Posts: 27,481

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    I do wonder if the people in NY / California see different US news compared to us. From my times in New York I very much doubt it the news was either very local or superfluous national news.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,714
    SMukesh said:

    Quite likely. When I was in Michigan recently, was being carpetted by Kamala Harris ads and none for Trump. She must be outspending him massively.

    Be interesting to see if she starts carpet-bombing Florida. If not, they don't believe the toss-up polls.

    But if they do, it supports the anecdotal evidence of a surge in support for Harris there. Heard the Floridian Cubans are none too happy about the "send them back" rhetoric - which is being perceived as a more general sentiment than just Haitians. If Trump loses Florida - still a planet-sized if - then JD Vance pushing the immigrant pet menu will win it for Harris. With 30 EC votes, Florida negates both Pennsylvania (19) and Arizona (11).
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,206

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    Maybe Farage put a good word in for him with the Don
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    That's simply not true.
    Biden has spent much of his presidency in bringing back manufacturing, very much concentrated in those states.

    It's reflected in the VP picks of both slates; the revival of Democrats in contending for and winning state governments; and in much if the infrastructure spending bill too.

    And even the economic dominance of the east and west coasts is beginning to be challenged by states like Texas.
    I see you've responded to what you imagined I said and not to what I actually said.
    So the President isn't an opinion former ?

    And I'd guess that US media is quite possibly more diverse in its attention than our London centric equivalent.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,759
    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    Not really - it's far more likely just Trump covering for the fact that he's no idea who Starmer is, beyond his just having been elected with a large majority.
    Indeed I doubt many Americans are aware he only got a third of the vote.

    I wonder if any aide reminded Trump of what Lammy (who was at the meeting) has said about him ? Probably not.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,465
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128
    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Absolute nonsense.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,003
    edited September 27
    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,634

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    SMukesh said:

    Quite likely. When I was in Michigan recently, was being carpetted by Kamala Harris ads and none for Trump. She must be outspending him massively.

    Be interesting to see if she starts carpet-bombing Florida. If not, they don't believe the toss-up polls.

    But if they do, it supports the anecdotal evidence of a surge in support for Harris there. Heard the Floridian Cubans are none too happy about the "send them back" rhetoric - which is being perceived as a more general sentiment than just Haitians. If Trump loses Florida - still a planet-sized if - then JD Vance pushing the immigrant pet menu will win it for Harris. With 30 EC votes, Florida negates both Pennsylvania (19) and Arizona (11).
    The Democrats have started spending serious money on the Florida and Texas Senate races - as it's looking as though Tester might lose his seat.
    I don't know that they're yet seriously contesting the presidential vote in either ?
    Emhoff was in Texas this week, FWIW.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,245
    Nigelb said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    Not really - it's far more likely just Trump covering for the fact that he's no idea who Starmer is, beyond his just having been elected with a large majority.
    Indeed I doubt many Americans are aware he only got a third of the vote.

    I wonder if any aide reminded Trump of what Lammy (who was at the meeting) has said about him ? Probably not.
    Oh yes, it's quite simple in Trump's mind. Head of State comes to meet Donald = that HoS thinks he's important = that HoS is a good guy. Same rules apply to SKS as they do to Kim Jong Un.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,439
    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    Err it would for Trump. Minnesota is 2% more Democrat than the national average according to this : https://www.270towin.com/2024-presidential-election-polls/

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,347
    edited September 27

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    There is a site called GroundNews, it is a news aggregator that is supposed to do just that. It gives you links to stories categorised by left / right and also highlight stories which are opposite to your own preference / bias.
  • MuesliMuesli Posts: 199

    Nigelb said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    Not really - it's far more likely just Trump covering for the fact that he's no idea who Starmer is, beyond his just having been elected with a large majority.
    Indeed I doubt many Americans are aware he only got a third of the vote.

    I wonder if any aide reminded Trump of what Lammy (who was at the meeting) has said about him ? Probably not.
    Oh yes, it's quite simple in Trump's mind. Head of State comes to meet Donald = that HoS thinks he's important = that HoS is a good guy. Same rules apply to SKS as they do to Kim Jong Un.
    Pedantsplaining here to point out that Sir Keir Starmer isn’t head of state. (He’s head of government.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    Possibly Politico, these days, as it's taken on something of a Republican bias since it was taken over.
    They still have some good journalists, and some of their long read pieces are excellent.

    The hardline GOP media just puts out nonsense like this.
    Watters: Kamala Harris is like a child. She hasn't put a single thought into anything and says whatever... She doesn't share.. she's mean. And she's not allowed to sit at the grown-up table because it she can't behave. She's spoiled and she's sheltered from real-life..
    https://x.com/Acyn/status/1839458923591659893
    Which I don't think you'll learn much from.
  • Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,245
    Muesli said:

    Nigelb said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    Not really - it's far more likely just Trump covering for the fact that he's no idea who Starmer is, beyond his just having been elected with a large majority.
    Indeed I doubt many Americans are aware he only got a third of the vote.

    I wonder if any aide reminded Trump of what Lammy (who was at the meeting) has said about him ? Probably not.
    Oh yes, it's quite simple in Trump's mind. Head of State comes to meet Donald = that HoS thinks he's important = that HoS is a good guy. Same rules apply to SKS as they do to Kim Jong Un.
    Pedantsplaining here to point out that Sir Keir Starmer isn’t head of state. (He’s head of government.)
    True. Thanks. I'll be more careful next time.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,439
    edited September 27

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    323-215 for Trump, Minnesota drops into his column.

    A 3% win for Trump is unlikely though I think.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418

    She's going to shit her pants when she hears about the toxic atmosphere her husband and his party come out with.

    Melania Trump has blamed the Democrats and mainstream media for "fuelling a toxic atmosphere" and empowering those who "want to do harm" to her husband

    https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1839555221162246609

    "shit her pants"

    hmmm

    I thought that was *his* role in the relationship?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734
    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,245
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    Possibly Politico, these days, as it's taken on something of a Republican bias since it was taken over.
    They still have some good journalists, and some of their long read pieces are excellent.

    The hardline GOP media just puts out nonsense like this.
    Watters: Kamala Harris is like a child. She hasn't put a single thought into anything and says whatever... She doesn't share.. she's mean. And she's not allowed to sit at the grown-up table because it she can't behave. She's spoiled and she's sheltered from real-life..
    https://x.com/Acyn/status/1839458923591659893
    Which I don't think you'll learn much from.
    Well, not about Harris ...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957
    edited September 27
    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
    In the interests of accuracy, Starmer might be accused of bribery and corruption, not embezzlement. Although I think a bribery charge for Starmer is pushing it, and it certainly pales in comparison with what Robert Jenrick has been getting up to, if he does become leader of the Conservative Party.

    And while the new Labour government may end up embezzling the state on the same scale as the previous Conservative one, they haven't yet.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    That's simply not true.
    Biden has spent much of his presidency in bringing back manufacturing, very much concentrated in those states.

    It's reflected in the VP picks of both slates; the revival of Democrats in contending for and winning state governments; and in much if the infrastructure spending bill too.

    And even the economic dominance of the east and west coasts is beginning to be challenged by states like Texas.
    Biden, started to.... Drain The Swamp.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,714
    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    US reporting of US politics is largely crap.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    323-215 for Trump, Minnesota drops into his column.

    A 3% win for Trump is unlikely though I think.
    Thanks.

    For what's basically a two party system, that's one helluva tilt on the table.

    (The UK equivalent- that Labour tend to get more seats than the Conservatives for a given vote share- is a bit more justified. That's about multi-party FPTP and the way that there's more LibLab slosh than LibCon. July 4 just took that to the absurd max.)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,128
    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    They often signpost what John Oliver and Jon Stewart are saying, which would be like referencing Joe or The Mash Report over here. Or that Channel 4 show with the Aussie with one leg.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418
    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    45% will vote for Trump. Nailed on. But not for the real Trump, But for what he represents. The anti-Democrat who gave them the Judges (Supreme Court). The Real Republican. (unlike RINOs - all the non MAGA Republicans.

    This creates the weird explanations of why the real Trump is somewhat distant from the ideal. The crimes etc. To bridge the gap between the real and the imagined saviour. Or should I say Saviour?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    A 3% lead for the Republicans would still be so narrow that anything could happen. A major probability of an EC win, but not guaranteed.

    The US really, really, doesn't do UNS.
  • FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
    In the interests of accuracy, Starmer might be accused of bribery and corruption, not embezzlement. Although I think a bribery charge for Starmer is pushing it, and it certainly pales in comparison with what Robert Jenrick has been getting up to, if he does become leader of the Conservative Party.

    And while the new Labour government may end up embezzling the state on the same scale as the previous Conservative one, they haven't yet.
    And that's the point.

    Starmer doesn't have to be good (whether operationally or morally) to be a big improvement on what went before.

    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is an excellent moral standard to hold oneself to, but it isn't practical politics.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,450
    In 2016, a lot of people predicted dire things about a Trump win. Most of those things did not occur.
    Many of those same people are predicting dire things about a Trump win in 2024.

    Trump's team could do worse than to highlight what his opponents said, and what Trump actually did.

    (I think I got my reaction to Trump's win in 2016 about right, sadly. Not instant negative change, but a slow reversal on rights in America.)
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 269

    Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    323-215 for Trump, Minnesota drops into his column.

    A 3% win for Trump is unlikely though I think.
    Thanks.

    For what's basically a two party system, that's one helluva tilt on the table.

    (The UK equivalent- that Labour tend to get more seats than the Conservatives for a given vote share- is a bit more justified. That's about multi-party FPTP and the way that there's more LibLab slosh than LibCon. July 4 just took that to the absurd max.)
    I think that FPTP delivers more seats per vote to the winning party rather than to either Lab or Con. Marginal wins vs marginal losses.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,439

    Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    323-215 for Trump, Minnesota drops into his column.

    A 3% win for Trump is unlikely though I think.
    Thanks.

    For what's basically a two party system, that's one helluva tilt on the table.

    (The UK equivalent- that Labour tend to get more seats than the Conservatives for a given vote share- is a bit more justified. That's about multi-party FPTP and the way that there's more LibLab slosh than LibCon. July 4 just took that to the absurd max.)
    It's mostly to do with the fact that Florida and Texas are closer than New York and California.

    Taking

    PA
    GA
    NC
    MI
    AZ
    WI
    NV

    as toss up states, leaves

    139354801 in Democrat states
    134159957 in GOP states
    61400137 in the toss ups.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,082
    edited September 27
    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    Three things about Trump's marbles lossage. First, the boy who cried wolf has been pointing out Trump's decline for years, even when the so-called evidence is Trump telling a joke or performing his schtick, like the shark/battery stuff. So when there is a wolf and Trump's brain does freeze, no-one takes the critics seriously.

    Second, no-one cared when they could see Reagan or Bush's decline, so why should this time be different?

    Third, Trump, however flawed, is ‘our guy’ in a forced choice election and that counts for a lot, just as it did during Joe Biden's faux pas.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,450

    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
    In the interests of accuracy, Starmer might be accused of bribery and corruption, not embezzlement. Although I think a bribery charge for Starmer is pushing it, and it certainly pales in comparison with what Robert Jenrick has been getting up to, if he does become leader of the Conservative Party.

    And while the new Labour government may end up embezzling the state on the same scale as the previous Conservative one, they haven't yet.
    And that's the point.

    Starmer doesn't have to be good (whether operationally or morally) to be a big improvement on what went before.

    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is an excellent moral standard to hold oneself to, but it isn't practical politics.
    It'd be a good start for them to try though. And Starmer isn't even trying to match his own holier-than-thou rhetoric.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418

    In 2016, a lot of people predicted dire things about a Trump win. Most of those things did not occur.
    Many of those same people are predicting dire things about a Trump win in 2024.

    Trump's team could do worse than to highlight what his opponents said, and what Trump actually did.

    (I think I got my reaction to Trump's win in 2016 about right, sadly. Not instant negative change, but a slow reversal on rights in America.)

    The problem, this time round, is that the people around Trump have realised their opportunity. Just as he delivered the Judges, they want him to deliver far more. The 2025 Project is just the most extreme version of this.

    In addition, they have spent the last 4 years installing, where they can, people throughout the system, who will do whatever Trump wants.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,003
    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
    In the interests of accuracy, Starmer might be accused of bribery and corruption, not embezzlement. Although I think a bribery charge for Starmer is pushing it, and it certainly pales in comparison with what Robert Jenrick has been getting up to, if he does become leader of the Conservative Party.

    And while the new Labour government may end up embezzling the state on the same scale as the previous Conservative one, they haven't yet.
    Can be dressed up any old way and say others do it too but not a good look and shows he has few morals or principles, just another grifter
  • FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would have top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,418

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would have top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
    I think it would be Gift Tax that would be relevant here....
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,058

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    Maybe it depends what it is you don't want to know. The betting point of view wants to know in advance what particular exact outcomes are going to be. No amount of party verbiage will help; but reporting is clear that it could be close.

    It isn't hard to get accounts from vox pops about the rust belt/nationalist saviour that Trump is. Nor is it hard (I think) to access what Trump has to say. Hope that helps.

    The two things that are hard and necessary are these: Analysis of what a Trump led USA will do in domestic and foreign policy; and the extent to which it could be a threat to either the internatioal (dis)order or the American constitution.

    And secondly, a rational account which can represent Trump as other than a crook and a danger.

    Of what I have seen, the Economist is the best source for the first (answer: wait and see, but he is much more prepared for radical action than last time and only God knows about the international order under Trump but he doesn't like wars and he does like other demagogues).

    The second can't be done SFAICS. It would need an American Matt Goodwin. Is there one?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,734

    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    They often signpost what John Oliver and Jon Stewart are saying, which would be like referencing Joe or The Mash Report over here. Or that Channel 4 show with the Aussie with one leg.
    Or alternatively, Justin Webb regurgitates verbatim what his Republican contacts tell him.
    There's not much original journalism.
  • Anyway, new poll from Techne:

    Labour: 32% (-1)
    Conservatives: 22% (+1)
    Lib Dems: 13% (=)
    Reform UK: 18% (=)
    Greens: 7% (=)
    SNP: 2% (=)
    Others: 6% (=)


    https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,765
    edited September 27

    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    US reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    And US reporting of UK politics, when it happens at all, is entirely crap. I got a concerned message or two from friends over the summer hoping I was keeping myself safe as our cities burned.

    One lives in Miami and the other in Houston, cities far more dangerous than any in England any day of the year.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,714
    edited September 27
    Nigelb said:

    SMukesh said:

    Quite likely. When I was in Michigan recently, was being carpetted by Kamala Harris ads and none for Trump. She must be outspending him massively.

    Be interesting to see if she starts carpet-bombing Florida. If not, they don't believe the toss-up polls.

    But if they do, it supports the anecdotal evidence of a surge in support for Harris there. Heard the Floridian Cubans are none too happy about the "send them back" rhetoric - which is being perceived as a more general sentiment than just Haitians. If Trump loses Florida - still a planet-sized if - then JD Vance pushing the immigrant pet menu will win it for Harris. With 30 EC votes, Florida negates both Pennsylvania (19) and Arizona (11).
    The Democrats have started spending serious money on the Florida and Texas Senate races - as it's looking as though Tester might lose his seat.
    I don't know that they're yet seriously contesting the presidential vote in either ?
    Emhoff was in Texas this week, FWIW.
    The voters of Florida could do a whole lot better than Republican incumbent Rick Scott, who pleaded the Fifth 75 times in testimony regarding kickbacks to doctors where Columbia/HCA pleaded guilty to 14 felonies and agreed to a $600+ million fine in what was at the time the largest health care fraud settlement in U.S. history. He won in 2018 with just 50.06% of the vote.

    Ted Cruz won Texas in 2018 with 50.89% - pretty close considering Texas has not elected a Democrat to any statewide office since 1994. Since his election, in February 2021, during a historic winter storm, up to 4.3 million Texas residents were left without power and millions of others without drinking water, including Cruz and his family. In the middle of the storm, Cruz and his family were spotted on a plane heading to Cancún, Mexico, where they planned to stay at the luxury Ritz Carlton hotel and escape their home. We'll see how much that has hurt him, but polling has recently showed the race to be toss-up.

    I don't think anyway expects Tester to win again. But spending on both Texas and Florida could yet allow both to fall and keep the Senate with the Democrats in what is a very tough set of elections for them.

    The extent to which Florida and/or Texas could go to Harris in 2024 as a result of down-ticket voting against unpopular Republican incumbents is intriguing. We'll know in six weeks.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,444

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    It makes sense for a Federal state as opposed to a Unitary state. Britain is a Unitary state, so it doesn't make much sense to us.

    I couldn't say to what extent most Americans view themselves as citizens of their State, taking a collective decision as Texans, or Michiganders, who they would like to be President, as opposed to a collective decision as Americans. Arguably the US has become predominantly a Unitary state over the centuries, and the voting system for President is an anachronism from its Federal origins.

    If the EU were to start electing [one of] its Presidents directly I think an Electoral College system might be the best place to start, rather than a simple direct vote.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,660

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Perhaps Trump has the goods on SKS.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,481

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would have top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
    For the entertainment - the get out clause is that it's for business purposes so the company paying would be responsible for the tax...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,660

    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    Iol, you gotta pick a pocket or two. Someone with a starmer crush
    In the interests of accuracy, Starmer might be accused of bribery and corruption, not embezzlement. Although I think a bribery charge for Starmer is pushing it, and it certainly pales in comparison with what Robert Jenrick has been getting up to, if he does become leader of the Conservative Party.

    And while the new Labour government may end up embezzling the state on the same scale as the previous Conservative one, they haven't yet.
    And that's the point.

    Starmer doesn't have to be good (whether operationally or morally) to be a big improvement on what went before.

    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is an excellent moral standard to hold oneself to, but it isn't practical politics.
    It'd be a good start for them to try though. And Starmer isn't even trying to match his own holier-than-thou rhetoric.
    I don’t know about that - his story about why he needed the flat is certainly pretty holey.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,444

    Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    323-215 for Trump, Minnesota drops into his column.

    A 3% win for Trump is unlikely though I think.
    Thanks.

    For what's basically a two party system, that's one helluva tilt on the table.

    (The UK equivalent- that Labour tend to get more seats than the Conservatives for a given vote share- is a bit more justified. That's about multi-party FPTP and the way that there's more LibLab slosh than LibCon. July 4 just took that to the absurd max.)
    I don't think that's true. It will be because average turnout is higher in Tory seats (rural, older) than in Labour seats (urban, younger).

    Imagine Labour and Tories are level on seats each winning their seats by 50-40. The Tories will receive more votes because the turnout is higher in their seats.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995
    Yes, based on the Yougov MRP it looks like Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arizona are the closest states and will decided the election.

    Morning Consult meanwhile has Harris ahead by 6% in Nevada, 3% in Wisconsin, 6% in Pennsylvania, 2% in North Carolina and 4% in Michigan and Arizona by 3%.

    Georgia is tied
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2024-09-26/harris-holds-thin-lead-over-trump-in-swing-state-poll-election-2024
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,188

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    It makes sense for a Federal state as opposed to a Unitary state. Britain is a Unitary state, so it doesn't make much sense to us.

    I couldn't say to what extent most Americans view themselves as citizens of their State, taking a collective decision as Texans, or Michiganders, who they would like to be President, as opposed to a collective decision as Americans. Arguably the US has become predominantly a Unitary state over the centuries, and the voting system for President is an anachronism from its Federal origins.

    If the EU were to start electing [one of] its Presidents directly I think an Electoral College system might be the best place to start, rather than a simple direct vote.
    There are other federal countries in the world, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_federal_system , but none other than the US has something like the Electoral College.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995
    edited September 27

    Anyway, new poll from Techne:

    Labour: 32% (-1)
    Conservatives: 22% (+1)
    Lib Dems: 13% (=)
    Reform UK: 18% (=)
    Greens: 7% (=)
    SNP: 2% (=)
    Others: 6% (=)


    https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/

    Slightly better for the Tories than their last poll but the main swing since the GE remains Labour and Tory to Reform
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,243

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    I just hope Keir had access to a top notch power shower (however funded) after the meeting.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would my top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
    Something else no journalist has pointed out is that gifting rules are different when you're in government. These gifts are historical as Starmer would no longer be able take them now he's in government. The Bribery Act applies to the function the receiver performs, at the time simple MP, and you have to show the bribe was intended to, or could be seen to, subvert the performance of that function. Starmer appears to have received this stuff within policy. You could make a bribery case against him, but not straightforward, I think.

    The public can rightly have no interest in any of the legalities, and think this doesn't smell right. And that's fine. If you can't cope with that you shouldn't be a politician.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    Sounds like Starmer and Trump had an interesting lunch yesterday. Trump had some positive words for Sir Keir saying "I actually think he’s very nice. He ran a great race, he did very well, it’s very early, he’s very popular."

    He also praised Nige too unsurprisingly 'Mr Trump went on to praise Reform UK leader Nigel Farage as well, saying: "I think Nigel is great, I've known him for a long time."

    "He had a great election too, picked up a lot of seats, more seats than he was allowed to have actually.

    "They acknowledged that he won but for some reason you have a strange system over there, you might win them but you don't get them."
    https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-to-meet-with-donald-trump-to-establish-a-relationship-13222644

    Yet while Trump found time to meet Starmer, it seems Harris couldn't find a slot in her diary to see him, meeting Zelensky instead
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,444
    edited September 27

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    It makes sense for a Federal state as opposed to a Unitary state. Britain is a Unitary state, so it doesn't make much sense to us.

    I couldn't say to what extent most Americans view themselves as citizens of their State, taking a collective decision as Texans, or Michiganders, who they would like to be President, as opposed to a collective decision as Americans. Arguably the US has become predominantly a Unitary state over the centuries, and the voting system for President is an anachronism from its Federal origins.

    If the EU were to start electing [one of] its Presidents directly I think an Electoral College system might be the best place to start, rather than a simple direct vote.
    There are other federal countries in the world, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_federal_system , but none other than the US has something like the Electoral College.
    The Swiss, for example, have an even less direct system, though. The Italian President is also indirectly elected. Also the German President.

    I think there are lots of Presidents who aren't elected by a simple majority vote among adult citizens.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,634

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    Three things about Trump's marbles lossage. First, the boy who cried wolf has been pointing out Trump's decline for years, even when the so-called evidence is Trump telling a joke or performing his schtick, like the shark/battery stuff. So when there is a wolf and Trump's brain does freeze, no-one takes the critics seriously.

    Second, no-one cared when they could see Reagan or Bush's decline, so why should this time be different?

    Third, Trump, however flawed, is ‘our guy’ in a forced choice election and that counts for a lot, just as it did during Joe Biden's faux pas.
    Yeah. The third point is spot on - I think magnified by the fact that although he was a completely ineffective president in many ways, his great 'success' was in appointing conservative judges in a way that may rig the American legal system for a long time. Which may actually under the US system be more important.

    With Trump's marbles losage, he's clearly not as sharp as in 2016 - the zingers aren't as quick for one thing. There's a slight tiredness that wasn't there before. But I'm not really commenting on that - more that it's very difficult to report and judge how to cover him, because you can't do what you'd do with most politicians and report their words straight. Because they wouldn't make any sense.

    If Harris, or say, Keir Starmer say something then it's fair to say that's Democrat or Labour policy or their attitude and you can judge if it's good or bad. Trump-supporting as well as neutral or critical media has to some extent act as Trump whisperers and deciphering whether he actually means x or y or whether he's switched on the TV and got hugely upset about something he'll have forgotten about in a few days.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,910
    kinabalu said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    I just hope Keir had access to a top notch power shower (however funded) after the meeting.
    Are you not better than childish teenager 'jokes'? Why would he need a top notch power shower?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,910
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would my top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
    Something else no journalist has pointed out is that gifting rules are different when you're in government. These gifts are historical as Starmer would no longer be able take them now he's in government. The Bribery Act applies to the function the receiver performs, at the time simple MP, and you have to show the bribe was intended to, or could be seen to, subvert the performance of that function. Starmer appears to have received this stuff within policy. You could make a bribery case against him, but not straightforward, I think.

    The public can rightly have no interest in any of the legalities, and think this doesn't smell right. And that's fine. If you can't cope with that you shouldn't be a politician.
    I think the old dictum is right - its always the cover-up that's the issue. The story about Starmer's use of Alli's flat keeps changing. Why is that?
  • FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would have top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?

    FF43 said:

    Despite his many problems its good to see SKS has the full support of Donald Trump.

    "Donald Trump heaped praise on “popular” Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the first meeting between the pair on Thursday night."

    Some cheer for the PB Left

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/26/starmer-talks-trump-unavailable-harris/

    At last some good news for SKS!
    He approves of his embezzlement!
    Point of order. Starmer hasn't embezzled anything. Unlike people associated with the Conservative Party who stole £15 billion from the State in dodgy Covid contracts.
    No journalists (to my knowledge) have pointed out that if you run a business and received £100k worth of freebies you might be in trouble under the Bribery Act and you almost certainly would have top pay Benefit in Kind tax. As he is already in the 45% bracket it means he ought to get a tax bill of £45k

    Any accountants in that want to comment? Am I right?
    I could quote you the relevant tax rules issued by HMRC but as a broad rule, if you are not an employee of the hospitality provider there is no BIK arising.

    Why ale house accountants continue to post such rubbish is beyond me.

    The provision of 10 Downing Street as accommodation is a BIK and if you google it you will find Sunaks broad tax details

  • Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    I often see plugs for "Ground News" in YouTube videos, which is supposed to look at sources across the spectrum: has anybody here tried it and is it any good?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,058

    Anyway, new poll from Techne:

    Labour: 32% (-1)
    Conservatives: 22% (+1)
    Lib Dems: 13% (=)
    Reform UK: 18% (=)
    Greens: 7% (=)
    SNP: 2% (=)
    Others: 6% (=)


    https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/

    I suggest a new tracker is needed, maybe even with a red and blue dotted line, starting from GE of 2017. On that day, not so long ago, the Lab/Con combined support was 82.3%. At GE 2024 it was 57.4%. In this poll it is 54%.

    There must be a point at which this plummeting figure becomes game changing. So which way it goes is important. One to watch.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 7,899

    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    They often signpost what John Oliver and Jon Stewart are saying, which would be like referencing Joe or The Mash Report over here. Or that Channel 4 show with the Aussie with one leg.
    I watched Stewart after Biden's disastrous debate and was really surprised at how brutal he was about it. I suppose that's why he has lasted so long - he's on the left but you don't get a sense he's particularly partisan.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,506
    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    Maybe it depends what it is you don't want to know. The betting point of view wants to know in advance what particular exact outcomes are going to be. No amount of party verbiage will help; but reporting is clear that it could be close.

    It isn't hard to get accounts from vox pops about the rust belt/nationalist saviour that Trump is. Nor is it hard (I think) to access what Trump has to say. Hope that helps.

    The two things that are hard and necessary are these: Analysis of what a Trump led USA will do in domestic and foreign policy; and the extent to which it could be a threat to either the internatioal (dis)order or the American constitution.

    And secondly, a rational account which can represent Trump as other than a crook and a danger.

    Of what I have seen, the Economist is the best source for the first (answer: wait and see, but he is much more prepared for radical action than last time and only God knows about the international order under Trump but he doesn't like wars and he does like other demagogues).

    The second can't be done SFAICS. It would need an American Matt Goodwin. Is there one?
    Go Trump.

    Doesn't like wars sounds good to me. As for does like "other demagogues" you mean people in charge of repressive regimes that you/ our govt don't happen to approve of. As opposed to the people in charge of repressive regimes who you/our govt does approve of.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    Shit weather isn't it?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,910
    TimS said:

    Shit weather isn't it?

    "I find it rather bracing"
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    So read US sources.
    What's a good GOP source? I see the NYT, WP, etc., which have the same biases. I'd like to have a source that tells me what I don't want to know.
    Maybe it depends what it is you don't want to know. The betting point of view wants to know in advance what particular exact outcomes are going to be. No amount of party verbiage will help; but reporting is clear that it could be close.

    It isn't hard to get accounts from vox pops about the rust belt/nationalist saviour that Trump is. Nor is it hard (I think) to access what Trump has to say. Hope that helps.

    The two things that are hard and necessary are these: Analysis of what a Trump led USA will do in domestic and foreign policy; and the extent to which it could be a threat to either the internatioal (dis)order or the American constitution.

    And secondly, a rational account which can represent Trump as other than a crook and a danger.

    Of what I have seen, the Economist is the best source for the first (answer: wait and see, but he is much more prepared for radical action than last time and only God knows about the international order under Trump but he doesn't like wars and he does like other demagogues).

    The second can't be done SFAICS. It would need an American Matt Goodwin. Is there one?
    Go Trump.

    Doesn't like wars sounds good to me. As for does like "other demagogues" you mean people in charge of repressive regimes that you/ our govt don't happen to approve of. As opposed to the people in charge of repressive regimes who you/our govt does approve of.
    Chamberlain wasn't a fan of wars either.

    Trade wars on the other hand. Trump loves those. If his tariff plans get anywhere near the statute books then we'll be completing the 1930s bingo card.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,506
    Eabhal said:

    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    FF43 said:

    Way much closer than it should be.

    We hear about the east and west coast, where the media and opinion formers live and are overwhelmingly Harris, but this is decided in the sun and rust belt, and the swing states are very rusty.

    And no one likes to go there or talk or listen to them very much.
    Yes, I'm annoyed by the UK media telling me what I think I want to hear - people in NY and California saying Trump is nuts. He may be, but it'd not usefully balanced reporting.
    The difficulty is that there are no two ways about it, if you directly report the things Trump says without editorialising - which could be said to be as balanced as possible - then he is truly nuts. Every speech contains rambling non-sequiturs that from the mouth of anyone else would be evidence of some kind of cognitive impairment, not because they're foul but incoherent.

    But it's Trump and he seems to have a weird ability of celebrity to bend reality around himself and partisanship is so strong, even lots of Republicans who think he's crackers will vote for him because it means government will be packed with their people. Trump's great attribute from the point of view of the US right, and evangelicals in particular was that no President before was quite so willing to trample norms to get their judges and officials in. The so-called 'Project 2025' is about completing that job, as they see it. But what he's often saying can't be covered with a straight face without pointing out it's quite mad.

    From there, you are really trying to editorialise to explain it and hit the spot of where the election is to get the feel of why it is where it is. No doubt we'll see much more coverage from the seven swing states - from UK outlets - as the election gets closer. Most won't have sent out all their people and resources yet so will still be largely covering the he said/she said from Washington and NYC still rather than the deep dive reporting from the places that matter.
    UK reporting of US politics is largely crap.
    They often signpost what John Oliver and Jon Stewart are saying, which would be like referencing Joe or The Mash Report over here. Or that Channel 4 show with the Aussie with one leg.
    I watched Stewart after Biden's disastrous debate and was really surprised at how brutal he was about it. I suppose that's why he has lasted so long - he's on the left but you don't get a sense he's particularly partisan.
    He was likely distraught and angry that a saint (all those on the left are saints) had let him down
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,380
    edited September 27
    Just seen on the last thread the comment that Kids Company should have been a wake up call re charities.

    I thought that was an issue long resolved. From Wikipedia (but largely quoting the judge in the court case:
    In February 2021, after a three-year case, Mrs Justice Falk in the High Court rejected the Official Receiver's assertion that Batmanghelidjh and the other trustees were unfit to be directors of a charity, saying "Most charities would, I think, be delighted to have available to them individuals with the abilities and experience that the trustees in this case possess. It is vital that the actions of public bodies do not have the effect of dissuading able and experienced individuals from becoming or remaining charity trustees".[11] She said: "[A] restructuring plan was agreed and a further government grant was awarded, however the charity was forced to close after sexual assault allegations [the same week]. The charity was exonerated following a police investigation - but by that time it was too late. Had it not been for those unfounded allegations, it is more likely than not that the restructuring would have succeeded and the charity would have survived."[12] The judge found that there had been "no dishonesty, bad faith or personal gain on the part of Batmanghelidjh or the trustees ... Nor had there been any inappropriate expenditure on children assisted by the charity"
    .

    Has something emerged since then to overturn that?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,601
    TimS said:

    Shit weather isn't it?

    My phone tells me that it feels 8 degrees colder than it is.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    algarkirk said:

    Anyway, new poll from Techne:

    Labour: 32% (-1)
    Conservatives: 22% (+1)
    Lib Dems: 13% (=)
    Reform UK: 18% (=)
    Greens: 7% (=)
    SNP: 2% (=)
    Others: 6% (=)


    https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/

    I suggest a new tracker is needed, maybe even with a red and blue dotted line, starting from GE of 2017. On that day, not so long ago, the Lab/Con combined support was 82.3%. At GE 2024 it was 57.4%. In this poll it is 54%.

    There must be a point at which this plummeting figure becomes game changing. So which way it goes is important. One to watch.
    Though that poll surprises me. For LRG to remain flat given the Labour tribulations and the paucity of decent Tory leadership candidates is a poor show.

    LRG? Or does GLR sounds better? LRG perhaps too similar sounding to LLG. Or do we add SNP and other too? I think we should

    SLORG (the). The SLORG has stayed flat on 46%
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,058

    Sean_F said:

    Without toss-ups, Yougov has Harris winning 276-262, which is in line with current State polling.

    Not too long ago, a lead of 3% could give you a 100 seat lead in the EC.

    What would the EC score be if there were a 3% Republican lead?

    Whatever one thinks about the idea that the flyover states shouldn't be overlooked, an electoral system where some bits of geography carry more clout per voter than others is an awfully rum one.
    It makes sense for a Federal state as opposed to a Unitary state. Britain is a Unitary state, so it doesn't make much sense to us.

    I couldn't say to what extent most Americans view themselves as citizens of their State, taking a collective decision as Texans, or Michiganders, who they would like to be President, as opposed to a collective decision as Americans. Arguably the US has become predominantly a Unitary state over the centuries, and the voting system for President is an anachronism from its Federal origins.

    If the EU were to start electing [one of] its Presidents directly I think an Electoral College system might be the best place to start, rather than a simple direct vote.
    Not sure. Isn't the election of a national single supreme individual on the basis of OMOV different? However federal you are, POTUS is there to represent and lead all citizens equally. It is very hard to justify this person being the one who came second when counting the OMOV votes.

    Obvious like our FPTP with single member constituencies, politics has to bend itself around the realities, and democrats need to work harder in small population states because of the oddities, just as Labour worked hard to come first by a bit in 400 seats with 34% of the vote rather than come first by loads in 300 seats with 40% of the vote.

    But the USA system still sits uncomfortably.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112

    TimS said:

    Shit weather isn't it?

    My phone tells me that it feels 8 degrees colder than it is.
    And it looks a further 2 degrees colder than it feels.
Sign In or Register to comment.