Categories
The fundamentals and history still favour Trump and punters agree – politicalbetting.com
The fundamentals and history still favour Trump and punters agree – politicalbetting.com
Our analysis shows candidate ahead on key issue wins 85% of the time.So available data suggests coin toss but it does seem like fundamentals (& low Biden approvals) favour Trump. Especially if you add history of polling misses in blue wall.So yeah ????
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Trump just cancelled another tv interview. This isn't normal and Americans deserve to know what is wrong with him.
https://x.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1846198091483173253
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lj58jql8o
I do hope that we're going to exercise our Brexit freedoms and mandate USB B Micro
The incumbent is unpopular because of perceived failure on the economy and has been forced to withdraw from the contest following a disastrous debate. They have been replaced by their deputy, leaving their party tied to the record of the incumbent.
The challenger is favoured on the two most important issues to the electorate - the economy and immigration - and is personally more popular now than when they won election eight years ago.
That sounds like it should be a blowout win for the Challenger. It won't be, in part because the strength of the partisan divide makes a blowout win for either side much more difficult.
But the Democrats and Harris have a hell of a mountain to climb for this election.
My gut is that the polls are overstating Trump. I think they have overcorrected for the errors of the last election - there are no shy Trump voters now. If they are making a mistake about the composition of the electorate, I think it is more likely that they are underestimating the number of new voters and turnout % for young women, both of which skew Harris.
Furthermore, I think, given the small sample sizes of most of the Trump-biased pollsters (Rasmussen, Trafalgar etc…), there is a programme of poll shopping going on specifically in order to bias the RCP averages in Trumps favor.
My gut is that Harris wins 310-320 Electoral College votes (I.e. all the swing states, with an outside possibility of a Florida surprise). My fear is that this is wishful thinking.
"So here is a theory. The normal resting state of the race is for Trump to be a little ahead. But Harris has enjoyed three big bumps since becoming the Democratic candidate, and each of them has made the race trend her way before fading. The first bump, and biggest by far, was when Biden pulled out of the race. The second, and second biggest, was the Democratic convention. And the third was the Sept. 10 debate between Harris and Trump."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-memo/3187728/a-shift-in-the-race/
So similar to what I have written on here a couple of times over the last few weeks. Harris needs another bump.
https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2024-10-14/xl-bully-saved-from-destruction-savages-fellow-family-dog
Biden scraped home in the Electoral College, with a 4% lead. If Harris leads by 2% or so, that likely flips Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania to Trump.
https://youtu.be/TE3EZdoWIUw?si=fyede9OFYSwMHAdq
“If I had to bet, I think Kamala Harris will win comfortably.”
@RoryStewartUK tells @jhansonradio that polling companies are no longer working, and they’re scared to predict Trump will lose after miscalculating the 2016 election.
https://x.com/TimesRadio/status/1846219051518849350
No one knows.
As a cyclist this is to be welcomed.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/rogue-cyclists-prosecuted-courts-fines-red-traffic-lights-city-of-london-b1187884.html
What I do NOT know, is the degree (if any) that PB is being (ab)used as part of the Putin/Trump echo chamber back in US and elsewhere?
But Trump voters simply don't believe it, or don't care.
Below is a fascinating example of Trump supporters' fantasy world. They tell a story of Trump charity to Nelson Mandela that somehow has gone untold until now.
What actually happened was that Trump creditors seized his "Trump Shuttle" airline during Trump's first bankruptcy in summer 1990. The creditors leased Trump-branded planes to anyone who would pay a commercial rate, including Nelson Mandela's eight-city US tour that year...
https://x.com/davidfrum/status/1845924420621422788
There's an entire thread of this stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnlVzYBDcqw
Seeing as how that opinion plus $5 will get you a latte anywere from sea to shining sea.
(Am NOT dumping on Rory. Just noting that his opinion on polling & 2024 result is essentially worthless . . . same as almost everyone's . . .)
I am even more sure that the result will be either a straight Trump win, accepted as a fact by more or less all, or a result which will be bitterly contested more or less for ever with an outcome uncertain.
What this election lacks is any sense of joy that a great democracy is going to make a great democratic decision and democracy will thankfully and cheerfully get on with the outcome. This is an aspect of UK elections which really exists. I think it is tragically absent in the USA.
This is just supposition
It's just incredibly close. Are right wing pretendy pollsters twisting this? Maybe. Will Harris's GOTV and new voter registration give her an advantage? Maybe. Will the polls underestimate support for Trump once again? Maybe.
Anyone expressing a confident view one way or the other at this point almost certainly doesn't know what they are talking about.
Rick Wilson
@TheRickWilson
·
50m
At this rate, if Trump is sworn in, JD Vance will invoke the 25th Amendment in the car on the way back to the White House.
https://x.com/TheRickWilson
1. I think the Trump campaign is poll shopping. The sample sizes for Rasmussen, Trafalgar and Insider Advantage are all small and they are pumping out a lot of them. There is no pollster reliability weighting on RCP, so these small polls, shopped or not, count the same as those less frequent polls from the most reputable.
2. I think they are doing this as a deliberate campaign to skew the RCP average to Trump, and that these actions more than account for the shift back towards Trump since the debate.
3. I doubt the pollsters have the right electorate and, unlike last time, this time they are underestimating the Dem vote.
This may be my confirmation bias. But don’t forget, the Washington Examiner is just as susceptible to confirmation bias as anyone else.
Good news that the judge has just thrown out the GA rule allowing local election officials’ right to dispute results.
PS. I see you have also mentioned the possibility of poll shopping. And, yes, it is way to close for comfort
In the stories about Salmond I did hear one clip from him where he promised that he would accept the result of the referendum gracefully if it went against him (debatable if he lived up to that but there we are). But what he said then is the day after a positive vote there would be no yes campaign and no no campaign. There would be team Scotland looking to take the country forward.
After Brexit you have to wonder at the truth of that too. I would say that it is unusual, whether in this country or the US for a democratic fight to bring people together. Sometimes the stakes seem higher than others. Corbyn was a real threat to this country. Trump is a real threat to democracy in the US. A clear win would be a good thing but I very much doubt we will see it.
@DanNeidle
·
3h
I don’t believe for a second the Budget will actually put up employer national insurance. It’s one of the worst taxes the Government could raise, and it probably breaks a manifesto promise.
https://x.com/DanNeidle/status/1846175976218091703
As far as the header is concerned, here's some issues polling released by the Harris campaign.
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1845895615030456820
They think the election is as tight as most of us now do.
That music thing looked really weird. Is there a full video of it anywhere ? (Edited excerpts can be misleading.)
That's true of every campaign ever; it's their default.
"Let's raise taxes on that."
An event with an impact along the lines of the Biden debate.
That's why he's cancelling planned interviews etc. If there's a growing problem, then three weeks is a very long time to manage it.
But maybe desperation is setting in at the Treasury?
This means Rachel wouldn't have to raise too many other taxes, good thing too bearing in mind most of what had been talked about won't work.
Still room for increase in CGT to 30%, reduction/elimination of CGT and dividend allowances, ISA limits, done technical IHT changes.
DYOR!
Gary (first Asian American governor on US mainland) was greatly helped by his unflappable demeanor, including ability to listen to insults, bullshit, etc. while NOT responding in kind.
He actually turned into a rather unlikely audience favorite, to the point that he actually hosted a few of these shows on Seattle talk radio, subsituting for the regular shock jock, Republican John Carlson.
Incidentially, Carlson ran against Locke for Gov in 2000 . . . who beat him like a gong (58% versus 40%).
He could, when in the mood, deliver an engaging speech. Not Blair level, but really quite good.
Starmer is to Brown what Sunak was to Cameron.
Not the German I wanted.
https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/thomas-tuchel-agrees-new-england-manager-c90909spr
Rogan organises pretty much everything himself, he has one producer and one booker to give him ideas, that’s it.
His ‘rules’ are going to be that you turn up, sit for at least two hours, and we broadcast what we record with no edits bar a bathroom break. Anything else and he’ll come across as a massive sellout to his own fanbase.
The same rules will of course apply to Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtLekgVMNNA 26 mins
Like it or not, the US polling industry is so contaminated with garbage, quite a lot of it in pretty bad faith, that any available signal is drowned out by noise. Most of their news media seem to have gone the same way.
On this side of the pond, the Mail and the Guardian are both dreadful in their own ways. But even when they fail to meet the standard of telling their readers what's actually going on around them, even when they don't particularly try, there is still an acknowledgement that there is a standard from which they have willingly fallen. In the intersection of American/Social/News Media, even that acknowledgement seems to have gone.
https://x.com/jonnygabriel/status/1846154883780493500?s=46
Rogan was great as a actor (at least on "NewsRadio) back in the last millennium. Since then . . .
Almost no-one bar the elites and the shareholders, feels better off than four years ago.
https://x.com/1nicdar/status/1846198298371076266
Graduates are much more likely to vote than non-graduates. Kamala has a big lead with graduates.
She has a better ground game with more money and resources.
"Anti" sentiment is a more powerful motivator to vote than "pro". There is much more "anti" sentiment against Trump. Look at the net approval ratings. Look at the candidates!
So ignoring the polls, which I suspect are being manipulated, who has the better chance?
Undercover policeman admits spying on Keir Starmer when he was a barrister
Spy says he accessed details of legal advice Starmer gave campaigners in McLibel case
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/oct/15/undercover-policeman-admits-spying-on-keir-starmer-when-he-was-a-barrister
election pledges, raise 20-30 billion a year, don't cause flight of the monied from the country, don't end up losing more than you gain, don't discourage enterprise, don't cost jobs and are reasonably willingly paid by those taxed?
Personally I suggest 5% VAT on all food; taxes on non-work income to be the same as earned income (including pensioners like me); revalue property for council tax and ensure a 2 million house always pays loads and loads more than a 200k house, regardless of location.
These modest suggestions would probably bring the government down.