Howdy, Stranger!

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

What Americans are expecting the election result to be and when – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited November 10 in General
What Americans are expecting the election result to be and when – politicalbetting.com

% of U.S. adults who expect the following election outcomeKamala Harris, by a large margin: 16%Kamala Harris, by a small margin: 26%Donald Trump, by a small margin: 20%Donald Trump, by a large margin: 16%Not sure: 21%https://t.co/rChz9ikJEc pic.twitter.com/KIr4GrrmHK

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,213
    First, like Trump
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    Do they have a previous version of that poll - because I’m more curious about the changes to the answers than the answers themselves.

    Put it this way - I don’t think those answers are the ones you would have got say even last Friday.

    Selzer seems to have completely changed the story
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,861
    RCP average now +0.1 Harris. The polls have the race as a toss up. Evens the pair. The betting is almost 60:40 in Trump's favour. Harris almost 2.5 when the polls have her at 2.0. You could make 25% on your money if you backed Harris at 2.5 and were able to lay her back at 2.0. Will this prove to be the biggest Political Betting value opportunity ever? Huge liquidity available.
  • eek said:

    Do they have a previous version of that poll - because I’m more curious about the changes to the answers than the answers themselves.

    Put it this way - I don’t think those answers are the ones you would have got say even last Friday.

    Selzer seems to have completely changed the story

    The story has changed the group think. There's an awful lot of canvassers and reporters and hacks now posting evidence of shouty man on the doorstep saying We're Voting Trump and his wife in the background mouthing that she's voting for Harris.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,676
    edited November 5
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I think/hope that Biden/Harris will toughen up their stance on Ukraine and Gaza immediately after this election.
    EDIT: LIke tomorrow.
  • Meanwhile, up here in Central Buchan I have to give 12 out of 10 to the SNP, whose leaflet pins 100% of the blame for Tory/LD council cuts onto the Tories.

    Marvellous. They've let me play the underdog fighting for every single pound we can get, and they're so daft as to not even blame us for the cuts we've had to vote through.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited November 5
    Apposite Korean Anecdote Alert

    I expected South Koreans to be 100% pro Harris and anti Trump. Turns out I am wrong

    He has a base of support here. South Koreans are generally very pro western and generally VERY pro American - and Trump is seen as a kind of doughty defender of the USA (and hence Korea?) in a way the Dems are not

    Or so my Seoul guide (a Dutchman living here and immersed in Korean culture) told me. My Korean female guide on Jeju backed it up
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    FPT, 'raspberry' does indeed contain two 'r's.

    ChatGPT didn't say it contained only two.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Leon said:

    Apposite Korean Anecdote Alert

    I expected South Koreans to be 100% pro Harris and anti Trump. Turns out I am wrong

    He has a base of support here. South Koreans are generally very pro western and generally VERY pro American - and Trump is seen as a kind of doughty defender of the USA (and hence Korea?) in a way the Dems are not

    Or so my Seoul guide (a Dutchman living here and immersed in Korean culture) told me. My Korean female guide on Jeju backed it up

    He likes to paint an image reminiscent of Reagan, the trouble is Trumps substance is almost the polar opposite of what Reagan stood for and did.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Some US restroom politics which didn't make many headlines.

    “Earlier this fall, a guerrilla marketing campaign started appearing on sticky notes in public restrooms around the country. ‘Woman to woman,’ read a representative message. ‘Your vote is private. #HarrisWalz2024.’”
    https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1853707935274119272
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    FPT:

    Re Georgia, and the view that more women out is a positive for Harris. It is worth remembering that Georgia was the site of a particularly high-profile case of an illegal immigrant killing a female student and one that generated a lot of anger.

    It might not be abortion that is driving these female voters out.

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-lede/will-laken-rileys-murder-tip-georgia

    Yes there’s been a lot of commentary on the Republican side about Laken Riley, and sadly a number of other similar cases that have been mentioned at rallies.

    Here’s Megyn Kelly at Trump’s rally last night, endorsing Trump and mentioning both the sad cases of murder and sexual assault by illegals, but also the controversial issue of women’s sports which might also drive turnout among younger women. It’s not necessarily just abortion behind the differential female turnout. https://x.com/megynkellyshow/status/1853643950512316882
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,112
    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,114
    "The results of the poll suggest Ms Harris’s efforts to reach across party lines may have paid off, as 8 per cent of Republicans said they will vote for her - compared to 5 per cent just a month ago."

    Telegraph (based on Marist poll)
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,213
    edited November 5
    Nigelb said:

    Some US restroom politics which didn't make many headlines.

    “Earlier this fall, a guerrilla marketing campaign started appearing on sticky notes in public restrooms around the country. ‘Woman to woman,’ read a representative message. ‘Your vote is private. #HarrisWalz2024.’”
    https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1853707935274119272

    I fear this sort of thing could be counterproductive, because it implies there was some doubt whether their votes actually are secret.

    Likewise the ads, which get people reflecting on whether they should lie to their spouses. Whereas before, they might just have walked up to the polling station and voted Harris without a moment’s thought.

    It’s like governments saying “vaccines work” or “the risk of a terrorist attack attach a tomorrow’s event is vanishingly small” or “we have no plans to raise tax”. Human psychology.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Off topic ish, it’s very confusing time wise watching this election from South Korea. Here in Seoul on election day November 5 it is nearly dusk. The bright autumn sun is setting over the mountains and skyscrapers

    So I’m thinking Ooh we should start getting exit polls soon. And then I check the time and it is only just gone midnight in Los Angeles. Basically, for is here out east today’s election will be tomorrow. And tomorrow. And tomorrow….

    *ominous doomsday sound*
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065

    Meanwhile, up here in Central Buchan I have to give 12 out of 10 to the SNP, whose leaflet pins 100% of the blame for Tory/LD council cuts onto the Tories.

    Marvellous. They've let me play the underdog fighting for every single pound we can get, and they're so daft as to not even blame us for the cuts we've had to vote through.

    This is the usual Lab/SNP approach. Attack the tories ignoring the LDs. Then during an election campaign point out that a vote for the LDs is just a vote for the tories.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,114
    FWIW: All five of Telegraph's analysts predict Trump win this morning, although saying will be close.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    There seems to be a rather odd belief from the peace-at-any-costs camp that Putin is an honourable and trustworthy actor.

    None of them have been able to back up this belief with reasoning. Hence, I fear it is just hope *despite* the contrary evidence.

    Putin knows what he wants, and has made that very clear many times. USSR redux, with Russia at its heart.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    edited November 5
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    This resonates. I could never vote for Trump, but I think he will win. (Less sure than I was though).As in 2016 I don't support either. Trump because he is Trump, Dems because I think they will continue bad management rather than resolution of foreign affairs.

    I want the USA with other parties (Saudi, EU, Turkey et al) to use its massive power to be resolvers of the middle east/Israel/Palestine, and not to just continue a 75 year long unjust management exercise. Ditto Ukraine, Sudan and so on.

    I think there is zero chance of the Democrats moving that way. A tiny chance that Trump will. The only thing I like about him is that he knows that there are few votes in dead US soldiers fighting losing wars. I think Trump and his backers have fascist tendencies, but that aspect of Trump - dislike of war - distinguishes him from some German leaders beginning with H now safely dead.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    Making comparisons with 2020 in terms of early vote is foolish .

    It’s like the pandemic didn’t happen !

    More GOP voters are voting early because Trump and the GOP have made a concerted effort to push that . The ED vote is going to be bluer than 2020 because of that .

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099
    algarkirk said:

    The only thing I like about him is that he knows that there are few votes in dead US soldiers fighting losing wars. I think Trump and his backers have fascist tendencies, but that aspect of Trump distinguishes him from some German leaders now dead.

    The anomaly there is his unwavering admiration for other leaders who are more than willing to sacrifice young men and women to sate their Imperialist ambitions.

    The other caveat is he doesn't like votes. If he wins, he has said there will never be another election in his lifetime, so sacrificing some US soldiers wouldn't be a hindrance
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    Smartphones and social media, as currently designed, are like fags and one day will be regulated as such.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099
    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    AI will fix it

    Oh, wait...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,442
    If this election really is all about the ladies (and the data so far seem to point that way), do we get a reasonable handle by looking at the queues? Trump needs there to be visibly more M than F lining up to win.

    Enterprising use of CCTV might tell us a lot.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    algarkirk said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    This resonates. I could never vote for Trump, but I think he will win. (Less sure than I was though).As in 2016 I don't support either. Trump because he is Trump, Dems because I think they will continue bad management rather than resolution of foreign affairs.

    I want the USA with other parties (Saudi, EU, Turkey et al) to use its massive power to be resolvers of the middle east/Israel/Palestine, and not to just continue a 75 year long unjust management exercise. Ditto Ukraine, Sudan and so on.

    I think there is zero chance of the Democrats moving that way. A tiny chance that Trump will. The only thing I like about him is that he knows that there are few votes in dead US soldiers fighting losing wars. I think Trump and his backers have fascist tendencies, but that aspect of Trump - dislike of war - distinguishes him from some German leaders beginning with H now safely dead.
    It's easy to stop these wars. "I am stopping all support to NATO and Ukraine" gives a quick Russian win. "I am quadrupling arms supply to Israel and sending over the Marine Corps to assist and I demand Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon are razed to the ground". Whether the outcomes are desirable is another question, but yes you have quickly stopped the wars.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    AI will fix it

    Oh, wait...
    Actually, I think it might
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    Smartphones and social media, as currently designed, are like fags and one day will be regulated as such.
    I completely agree. TikTok is like mental Fentanyl (note how it is forbidden in China!) - this is one area where a nanny state should actually step in
  • Morning. My Forcast 302 Harris. Trump 236. My formula is a secret! I am sure I will be held to account later on if I am incorrect.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,198
    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    I blame the quality of modern authors.
  • FWIW: All five of Telegraph's analysts predict Trump win this morning, although saying will be close.

    The Negagraph. Like their pre budget analysis.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
    Then Poland and East Germany, why stop there? Next stop Paris.
  • Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    So do I.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    FWIW: All five of Telegraph's analysts predict Trump win this morning, although saying will be close.

    That's the Telegraph - it's wishcasting...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
    Then Poland and East Germany, why stop there? Next stop Paris.
    Putin is not going to invade Poland, Germany and France. For a start he knows that will trigger nuclear war and destroy Russia forever

    You’re probably joking but it’s still good to keep Putin in perspective
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
    Then Poland and East Germany, why stop there? Next stop Paris.
    Putin is not going to invade Poland, Germany and France. For a start he knows that will trigger nuclear war and destroy Russia forever

    You’re probably joking but it’s still good to keep Putin in perspective
    The timeline is elastic. Midway through Vance's third or fourth term who knows how emboldened son of Putin might be?

    You and I might not see the results but our children could.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    eek said:

    FWIW: All five of Telegraph's analysts predict Trump win this morning, although saying will be close.

    That's the Telegraph - it's wishcasting...
    There's so much 'evidence' pointing in all sorts of directions, and much of it of dubious quality, that it's easy just to pick the 'evidence' that backs a position you want, and excuse it by pointing at the flaws in the contrary evidence.

    Doing a 'proper' analysis in this situation is next-to impossible - though there have been some creditable efforts on here. I doubt any of the five Telegraph pundits have gone to the effort, though.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Pretty much for the same reasons as you I am hoping for a Trump defeat. Also he would be a far greater enabler of Butcher Nethanyahu in the middle east than Harris.

    I do not buy all this "end of democracy" bollocks if he wins. But a Trump win would not be good for the world.

    Harris is a poor candidate but is far better than the Trumpdozer.

  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    edited November 5
    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    Smartphones and social media, as currently designed, are like fags and one day will be regulated as such.
    I completely agree. TikTok is like mental Fentanyl (note how it is forbidden in China!) - this is one area where a nanny state should actually step in
    TikTok either has no or a very limited filter on the algorithms that generate the feed in it's international version.

    TikTok does exist in China and is very popular but there it definitely does have algorithms designed to provide a very different view than the international version..

  • Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    So do I.
    I agree with you. Labour and Trump bad mix.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,111
    In totally-legitimate-political-betting news, there remains £2.5m looking to back Trump at 1.7 on Betfair. Just next to every other betting level where there is up to £0.05m ready to be staked.

    I think we may as well ignore betting odds as a guide to how well candidates are doing until polls close.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521
    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    I blame the quality of modern authors.
    I’ve never believed that more than 20% or so of people read for pleasure. I’m always surprised by the number who say they read because they have to, not because they enjoy it.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Pretty much for the same reasons as you I am hoping for a Trump defeat. Also he would be a far greater enabler of Butcher Nethanyahu in the middle east than Harris.

    I do not buy all this "end of democracy" bollocks if he wins. But a Trump win would not be good for the world.

    Harris is a poor candidate but is far better than the Trumpdozer.

    Paragraph 2. See 01/06/2021

    Paragraph 3. She has been a positive revelation compared to the rhetoric we heard prior to her candidacy. She can't do anything about being of colour and female so Trump might still win.
  • Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    edited November 5
    Sean_F said:

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    This is really sad


    “Children’s reading enjoyment has fallen to its lowest level in almost two decades, with just one in three young people saying that they enjoy reading in their free time, according to a new survey.”

    It’s down from 2 in 3 only eight years ago. A collapse

    We are breeding a generation transfixed by smartphones with the attention spans of minnows and their ethics and politics provided by TikTok

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/nov/05/report-fall-in-children-reading-for-pleasure-national-literacy-trust

    I blame the quality of modern authors.
    I’ve never believed that more than 20% or so of people read for pleasure. I’m always surprised by the number who say they read because they have to, not because they enjoy it.
    I'm always surprised when I go round to houses of intelligent people who don't seem to have any books in their houses.

    Now we have a whole library upstairs and that is now 90% Mrs Eek's books because 100% of my recent purchases have been on a kindle backlit allowing me to read at night after she's gone to sleep.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,442
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
    Then Poland and East Germany, why stop there? Next stop Paris.
    Putin is not going to invade Poland, Germany and France. For a start he knows that will trigger nuclear war and destroy Russia forever

    You’re probably joking but it’s still good to keep Putin in perspective
    The counterpoint is the one expressed in Yes, Minister. (Which, towards the end, was very definitely a show proposing real political ideas in a comedic way. Was it Jay or Lynn who was actually pretty ideological?)

    Nukes are good as a defence against nukes, but they are suicidal to use in any other context, because you get nukes right back.

    And an invader doesn't take all they want in one go, they salami slice. So none of the steps is sufficient to justify all our war, but they gain what they want quietly.

    The answer Jim Hacker was led to was National Service, but it was just a sitcom and nobody would be dumb enough to propose that, surely?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,755
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    It’s the one issue I care about in this election above all else and I still can’t decide what the better outcome is.

    Contrary to the narrative, I do not think Trump will force a situation that leads to the immediate capitulation of Ukraine. Far more likely is a frozen conflict.

    Equally, I am unclear that the Democrats strategy of “de-escalated” long term attritional warfare (with weak sanctions) necessarily leads to the collapse of the Russian army before Ukraine’s. Russia has shown little difficulty in regenerating its massive infantry losses and the DRPK development is concerning, because the first 12k might just be a down payment. Let’s assume the Dems strategy “works”, I don’t think we’re looking at the return to 2014 borders, it will still be a negotiated settlement.

    In either trump or Harris scenarios, the likelihood is that Putin stays in power and spends 5 years licking his wounds and regenerating his military capability. If trump wins, Europe and the Uk will wake up and hopefully start matching the Poles’ defence spending. But the dawn of US isolationism would be at a moment when Putin is utterly unprepared to attack an EU state. If Harris wins, complacency would likely win the day and we then get a rude awakening in 2028 if MAGA v2 wins and Russia’s army has recovered by then.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    No there isn’t - Trump will simply cut off the supply of arms to the Ukraine and Russia will take over. Then wait a few years to rebuild their supplies before moving on to the next part of “mother Russia” that was stolen from Moscow
    Which may include Finland.
    More the Baltics. Plus a nice big land corridor to Kaliningrad.
    Then Poland and East Germany, why stop there? Next stop Paris.
    Poland is too powerful.

    But, yes, everything about Putin suggests that his appetite for fresh conquest is fuelled by successful conquest.

    I favour Realism in foreign affairs. Give victory to an aggressor, and all that you do is teach
    him to do it again.

    Putin doesn't need to 'invade'. In fact, invasion is his last resort.

    What he does is two-fold:

    Firstly, he tries to subvert the democratic processes in countries he is interested in. Directly, as we have just seen in Moldova, and indirectly, by using things like immigration or by helping various other groups that furthers division in his target country.

    Secondly, if that fails, then he goes for direct confrontation. As he did in Georgia in 2008, and Ukraine in 2014 and 2022.

    We are far too weak on the former of these.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    The f- word is one thing. If "mong" is acceptable woke is dead.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    Scott_xP said:

    algarkirk said:

    The only thing I like about him is that he knows that there are few votes in dead US soldiers fighting losing wars. I think Trump and his backers have fascist tendencies, but that aspect of Trump distinguishes him from some German leaders now dead.

    The anomaly there is his unwavering admiration for other leaders who are more than willing to sacrifice young men and women to sate their Imperialist ambitions.

    The other caveat is he doesn't like votes. If he wins, he has said there will never be another election in his lifetime, so sacrificing some US soldiers wouldn't be a hindrance
    Spot on. I identify the only positive I can see. I can't see any others, except that sense that as his allies are terrified of him being president, our enemies might be even more wary. That doesn't really count as a positive.
  • Further proof that lawyers are the hardest working people in the world.

    US law firms in London demand 70-hour weeks — for £170,000 salaries

    Newly qualified solicitors report that they routinely finish after 10.30pm


    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/us-law-firms-in-london-demand-70-hour-weeks-for-170000-salaries-plhbbq5j3
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    edited November 5

    Further proof that lawyers are the hardest working people in the world.

    US law firms in London demand 70-hour weeks — for £170,000 salaries

    Newly qualified solicitors report that they routinely finish after 10.30pm


    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/us-law-firms-in-london-demand-70-hour-weeks-for-170000-salaries-plhbbq5j3

    Taking clients out to dinner at the Ivy on the expense account doesn't count as work!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    edited November 5
    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Here’s the opposite argument, eloquently put by an American Spectator columnist.

    https://x.com/bridgetphetasy/status/1852881275146703149

    In her mind the wokery and immigration outweigh the negatives. She says she’s not really voting *for* Trump, more like she’s voting against the Left.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    Further proof that lawyers are the hardest working people in the world.

    US law firms in London demand 70-hour weeks — for £170,000 salaries

    Newly qualified solicitors report that they routinely finish after 10.30pm


    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/us-law-firms-in-london-demand-70-hour-weeks-for-170000-salaries-plhbbq5j3

    Taking clients out to dinner doesn't count as work!
    Does shagging them?
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    I think the risk to Finland and the Baltics is higher with the democrats. If there is no strategic solution in Ukraine you are effectively supporting an endless war of attrition, with limited political will on the part of the US to back. This to my mind is an extremely dangerous outcome. The Biden administration has embarked on a project in Ukraine it has proven repeatedly it doesn't have the motivation to complete, despite it having the resources to do so. How many people have died? 1 million? For what purpose? A war of attrition in the hope of the Russian state collapsing? This strategy has failed. Russia is not collapsing, it is getting stronger, the west is getting weaker. But the strategy in Ukraine never changes, it is an afterthought in the back of the mind of an exhausted empire, an afghanistan like situation.

    Disruption to the strategy under Trump comes with very many risks, including the risk that Ukraine would just be abandoned. But I put the risk of that as being low given the evident self interest on the part of the US of maintaining support from its European allies. There are many possible outcomes, including the possibility that the war could actually be escalated to try and create the conditions for a lasting solution, at least insofar as Ukraine is concerned.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    edited November 5
    TimS said:

    Nigelb said:

    Some US restroom politics which didn't make many headlines.

    “Earlier this fall, a guerrilla marketing campaign started appearing on sticky notes in public restrooms around the country. ‘Woman to woman,’ read a representative message. ‘Your vote is private. #HarrisWalz2024.’”
    https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1853707935274119272

    I fear this sort of thing could be counterproductive, because it implies there was some doubt whether their votes actually are secret.

    Likewise the ads, which get people reflecting on whether they should lie to their spouses. Whereas before, they might just have walked up to the polling station and voted Harris without a moment’s thought.

    It’s like governments saying “vaccines work” or “the risk of a terrorist attack attach a tomorrow’s event is vanishingly small” or “we have no plans to raise tax”. Human psychology.
    I don't share those fears.
    Sure some women may think that way - but they were probably less likely to vote for Harris anyway. On balance, I think it works.

    And it's nothing like "government saying"; this is effectively a peer to peer campaign.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,442

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    The f- word is one thing. If "mong" is acceptable woke is dead.
    From the report;

    He said the situation at the company was “made worse by a failure to enforce standards generally, thereby leading to a culture of banter”. Ogden “had not been pulled up before over comments, and this likely led to a false sense of security in terms of it not being a disciplinary issue”.

    So it sounds more like the fault was the company not stamping down earlier. Not so much that either word was acceptable, but that the driver had reason to think they were tolerated in that office.

    Bad headline, though.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    It's worth reading the tribunal https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672346d63ce5634f5f6ef5b0/Mr_R_Ogden_v_Booker_Limited_-_2400482_2024_-_Reserved.pdf

    Yes what was said was wrong but Booker completely screwed up everything and seriously pi**ed off the judge to the extent that I think he was inclined to find in the delivery drivers favour.



  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,405
    One thing about Trump, whoever has been doing his ads this time round has earnt their money. They are amazing next to the patronising dross the Harris campaign has put out.
    I think Harris is going to win, more comfortably than people expect though.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    Have you any tangible forms for Trump’s ‘strategic’ and ‘updated’ solutions for Ukraine? Afaics all that Trumpism is offering is that with him it would be different but with no detail on how.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143

    FWIW: All five of Telegraph's analysts predict Trump win this morning, although saying will be close.

    That is most reassuring after their 99% failure rate on Budget predictions.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    edited November 5

    Further proof that lawyers are the hardest working people in the world.

    US law firms in London demand 70-hour weeks — for £170,000 salaries

    Newly qualified solicitors report that they routinely finish after 10.30pm


    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/us-law-firms-in-london-demand-70-hour-weeks-for-170000-salaries-plhbbq5j3

    Taking clients out to dinner at the Ivy on the expense account doesn't count as work!
    That’s not what NQs are doing at these firms - there is a reason why lawyers refer to them as “sweat shops”!
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    edited November 5
    darkage said:

    I think the risk to Finland and the Baltics is higher with the democrats. If there is no strategic solution in Ukraine you are effectively supporting an endless war of attrition, with limited political will on the part of the US to back. This to my mind is an extremely dangerous outcome. The Biden administration has embarked on a project in Ukraine it has proven repeatedly it doesn't have the motivation to complete, despite it having the resources to do so. How many people have died? 1 million? For what purpose? A war of attrition in the hope of the Russian state collapsing? This strategy has failed. Russia is not collapsing, it is getting stronger, the west is getting weaker. But the strategy in Ukraine never changes, it is an afterthought in the back of the mind of an exhausted empire, an afghanistan like situation.

    Disruption to the strategy under Trump comes with very many risks, including the risk that Ukraine would just be abandoned. But I put the risk of that as being low given the evident self interest on the part of the US of maintaining support from its European allies. There are many possible outcomes, including the possibility that the war could actually be escalated to try and create the conditions for a lasting solution, at least insofar as Ukraine is concerned.

    There is no strategic solution for the Ukraine.

    Putin wants Kiev - you can't negotiate if that is the desired end result...

    I really don't want to say this to a poster on here but you really don't have the first clue what you are talking about...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Pretty much for the same reasons as you I am hoping for a Trump defeat. Also he would be a far greater enabler of Butcher Nethanyahu in the middle east than Harris.

    I do not buy all this "end of democracy" bollocks if he wins. But a Trump win would not be good for the world.

    Harris is a poor candidate but is far better than the Trumpdozer.

    No, she's not.

    Gore was a poor candidate; as was Dukakis or Hillary.
    All had month to prepare their campaigns, and variously gaffed in the home straight. Gore even flubbed his Florida recount call.
    What missteps has Harris made ?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    Nigelb said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Pretty much for the same reasons as you I am hoping for a Trump defeat. Also he would be a far greater enabler of Butcher Nethanyahu in the middle east than Harris.

    I do not buy all this "end of democracy" bollocks if he wins. But a Trump win would not be good for the world.

    Harris is a poor candidate but is far better than the Trumpdozer.

    No, she's not.

    Gore was a poor candidate; as was Dukakis or Hillary.
    All had month to prepare their campaigns, and variously gaffed in the home straight. Gore even flubbed his Florida recount call.
    What missteps has Harris made ?
    Being female and a Democrat.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172

    algarkirk said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    This resonates. I could never vote for Trump, but I think he will win. (Less sure than I was though).As in 2016 I don't support either. Trump because he is Trump, Dems because I think they will continue bad management rather than resolution of foreign affairs.

    I want the USA with other parties (Saudi, EU, Turkey et al) to use its massive power to be resolvers of the middle east/Israel/Palestine, and not to just continue a 75 year long unjust management exercise. Ditto Ukraine, Sudan and so on.

    I think there is zero chance of the Democrats moving that way. A tiny chance that Trump will. The only thing I like about him is that he knows that there are few votes in dead US soldiers fighting losing wars. I think Trump and his backers have fascist tendencies, but that aspect of Trump - dislike of war - distinguishes him from some German leaders beginning with H now safely dead.
    It's easy to stop these wars. "I am stopping all support to NATO and Ukraine" gives a quick Russian win. "I am quadrupling arms supply to Israel and sending over the Marine Corps to assist and I demand Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon are razed to the ground". Whether the outcomes are desirable is another question, but yes you have quickly stopped the wars.
    That's not going to stop any wars.
  • TimS said:

    Nigelb said:

    Some US restroom politics which didn't make many headlines.

    “Earlier this fall, a guerrilla marketing campaign started appearing on sticky notes in public restrooms around the country. ‘Woman to woman,’ read a representative message. ‘Your vote is private. #HarrisWalz2024.’”
    https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1853707935274119272

    I fear this sort of thing could be counterproductive, because it implies there was some doubt whether their votes actually are secret.

    Likewise the ads, which get people reflecting on whether they should lie to their spouses. Whereas before, they might just have walked up to the polling station and voted Harris without a moment’s thought.

    It’s like governments saying “vaccines work” or “the risk of a terrorist attack attach a tomorrow’s event is vanishingly small” or “we have no plans to raise tax”. Human psychology.
    There IS doubt that their vote is secret from controlling men. This campaign has resonated because of this reality.

    Note the outraged response on Fux News and from GOP mouthpieces. A wife not obeying her husband, in *lying* that they are obeying and then secretly *betraying their marriage vows* by secretly voting Harris.

    No wonder that women will deliver the election for Harris.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    We live in two nations. From my north England perch (rural and industrial town) here are millions of people, of all ages, who would never use the traditional four letter words in public, including the great majority of older people and huge numbers of younger ones. There is a minority who use them a lot. In general the place I notice them most is in PB comments.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099

    Oh well, this is going to be fun, isn't it?

    Are we nearly there yet ???
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394
    It's not lawyers, it's doctors.

    Doctors paid £200,000 overtime to tackle NHS backlog
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0lkxl7061o

    Foxy's mates will have to do more private medicine to pay the income tax on their NHS overtime.
  • eek said:

    darkage said:

    I think the risk to Finland and the Baltics is higher with the democrats. If there is no strategic solution in Ukraine you are effectively supporting an endless war of attrition, with limited political will on the part of the US to back. This to my mind is an extremely dangerous outcome. The Biden administration has embarked on a project in Ukraine it has proven repeatedly it doesn't have the motivation to complete, despite it having the resources to do so. How many people have died? 1 million? For what purpose? A war of attrition in the hope of the Russian state collapsing? This strategy has failed. Russia is not collapsing, it is getting stronger, the west is getting weaker. But the strategy in Ukraine never changes, it is an afterthought in the back of the mind of an exhausted empire, an afghanistan like situation.

    Disruption to the strategy under Trump comes with very many risks, including the risk that Ukraine would just be abandoned. But I put the risk of that as being low given the evident self interest on the part of the US of maintaining support from its European allies. There are many possible outcomes, including the possibility that the war could actually be escalated to try and create the conditions for a lasting solution, at least insofar as Ukraine is concerned.

    There is no strategic solution for the Ukraine.

    Putin wants Kiev - you can't negotiate if that is the desired end result...

    I really don't want to say this to a poster on here but you really don't have the first clue what you are talking about...
    Yep - as I got older I increasingly think that we have to take these nutters at their word. All a bit “against interpretation.”

    When Putin talks about Belarus, Ukraine and Russia as one historical nation we have to assume he wants to unify them all (which is interesting if you are Belarusian - as you’ve been playing nice with the bear and eventually it may bite).

    Same with Trump. If he gets into power he will try to do what he has said he will do. Will he be able to who knows.

    But eventually most wars end in negotiation. The question for Ukraine is whether Putin gets to negotiate from strength and so can dictate his terms (a quisling government in Kiev like he’s got in Minsk may be enough). Or whether he has to negotiate from weakness - and he may have to settle for some sort of independence for the Russian speaking east of the country.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    A brief glance.
    https://danieldrezner.substack.com/p/niall-ferguson-tendentious-op-ed
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    eek said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    It's worth reading the tribunal https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672346d63ce5634f5f6ef5b0/Mr_R_Ogden_v_Booker_Limited_-_2400482_2024_-_Reserved.pdf

    Yes what was said was wrong but Booker completely screwed up everything and seriously pi**ed off the judge to the extent that I think he was inclined to find in the delivery drivers favour.



    one bit that I find interesting from the tribunal

    .As the term of abuse is not one relating to a protected characteristic, the
    case should be viewed in that light in my assessment.


    I would have thought 70's slang terms for a disability was a protected characteristic unless disabilities are not protected..
  • Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    They must be more to it. Calling someone a mong would normally a serious disciplinary offence, unless it was part of a banter (i know some say no such thing, but there is). Calling a customer such a thing has to be an immediate gross misconduct.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,069
    Nigelb said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Pretty much for the same reasons as you I am hoping for a Trump defeat. Also he would be a far greater enabler of Butcher Nethanyahu in the middle east than Harris.

    I do not buy all this "end of democracy" bollocks if he wins. But a Trump win would not be good for the world.

    Harris is a poor candidate but is far better than the Trumpdozer.

    No, she's not.

    Gore was a poor candidate; as was Dukakis or Hillary.
    All had month to prepare their campaigns, and variously gaffed in the home straight. Gore even flubbed his Florida recount call.
    What missteps has Harris made ?
    But it's not just minimising gaffes. It's being, politically, somewhere where a lot of the electorate can vote for you, or at least don't fear you. She is quite a long way left of this. People are voting Trump because of fear of what Harris will do.
    Tony Blair had this. SKS did, for all his insipid dullness. Obama did, of course. Bill Clinton did. Joe Biden did. I'm not convinced Harris does. She is too 21st century California for far too large a section of the electorate for comfort. She is plodding uninspiringly but unstumblingly towards the finish line, but that alone might not be enough if she's just perceived as too left wing.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    algarkirk said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    We live in two nations. From my north England perch (rural and industrial town) here are millions of people, of all ages, who would never use the traditional four letter words in public, including the great majority of older people and huge numbers of younger ones. There is a minority who use them a lot. In general the place I notice them most is in PB comments.
    Glasgow f*cking waves..
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Leon said:

    Apposite Korean Anecdote Alert

    I expected South Koreans to be 100% pro Harris and anti Trump. Turns out I am wrong

    He has a base of support here. South Koreans are generally very pro western and generally VERY pro American - and Trump is seen as a kind of doughty defender of the USA (and hence Korea?) in a way the Dems are not

    Or so my Seoul guide (a Dutchman living here and immersed in Korean culture) told me. My Korean female guide on Jeju backed it up

    Is he bollocks.

    Last time he was in office he tried to shake them down for protection money. The US has been a reliable guarantor of S Korea's security, whoever was in government, for seven decades; a second Trump term puts that into question.

    They've been rapidly ramping their defence investment ever since, just in case he gets in and abandons them.
  • SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 701
    algarkirk said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    We live in two nations. From my north England perch (rural and industrial town) here are millions of people, of all ages, who would never use the traditional four letter words in public, including the great majority of older people and huge numbers of younger ones. There is a minority who use them a lot. In general the place I notice them most is in PB comments.
    I find the word mong more offensive.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    algarkirk said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    We live in two nations. From my north England perch (rural and industrial town) here are millions of people, of all ages, who would never use the traditional four letter words in public, including the great majority of older people and huge numbers of younger ones. There is a minority who use them a lot. In general the place I notice them most is in PB comments.
    Glasgow f*cking waves..
    You can't actually be in Glasgow there isn't enough f***s in that sentence.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099
    If Trump loses I want to read all the inside campaign stories
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394
    Trial run for the results: Deliveroo delivered from McDonalds before 6am, and I was pleasantly surprised to find any riders working, though on the minus side, some Cabinet minister moonlighting at McDonalds for a photo-op sent the wrong stuff, so it's swings and roundabouts.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    eek said:

    darkage said:

    I think the risk to Finland and the Baltics is higher with the democrats. If there is no strategic solution in Ukraine you are effectively supporting an endless war of attrition, with limited political will on the part of the US to back. This to my mind is an extremely dangerous outcome. The Biden administration has embarked on a project in Ukraine it has proven repeatedly it doesn't have the motivation to complete, despite it having the resources to do so. How many people have died? 1 million? For what purpose? A war of attrition in the hope of the Russian state collapsing? This strategy has failed. Russia is not collapsing, it is getting stronger, the west is getting weaker. But the strategy in Ukraine never changes, it is an afterthought in the back of the mind of an exhausted empire, an afghanistan like situation.

    Disruption to the strategy under Trump comes with very many risks, including the risk that Ukraine would just be abandoned. But I put the risk of that as being low given the evident self interest on the part of the US of maintaining support from its European allies. There are many possible outcomes, including the possibility that the war could actually be escalated to try and create the conditions for a lasting solution, at least insofar as Ukraine is concerned.

    There is no strategic solution for the Ukraine.

    Putin wants Kiev - you can't negotiate if that is the desired end result...

    I really don't want to say this to a poster on here but you really don't have the first clue what you are talking about...
    I've not doubted the ambitions of Russia. But the analysis on here has been wrong over and over again. It is wishcasting and reassurance which just gets adapted to fit the updated situation, most of the discussion about Ukraine fits this category.

    A 'strategic solution' in Ukraine will resolve the problem of Russia continuously starting wars in Eastern Europe. What form that takes is not clear. It seems like everyone is in agreement that the solution is that Russia gets defeated in Ukraine and then gets scared off. But then you keep supporting the party that have repeatedly failed to implement that outcome, despite having every opportunity to do so.

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,897
    Eabhal said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    I think the second word is far more offensive.
    During a match my son's U15 football team was playing against a team from Orpington, one of the opposition players tried to punch the ref and called him a "sp*stic c*nt". I think everyone found the first word far more offensive than the second.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    algarkirk said:

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    We live in two nations. From my north England perch (rural and industrial town) here are millions of people, of all ages, who would never use the traditional four letter words in public, including the great majority of older people and huge numbers of younger ones. There is a minority who use them a lot. In general the place I notice them most is in PB comments.
    Sounds like a load of bollocks to me. Sorry.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,835
    ydoethur said:

    Further proof that lawyers are the hardest working people in the world.

    US law firms in London demand 70-hour weeks — for £170,000 salaries

    Newly qualified solicitors report that they routinely finish after 10.30pm


    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/us-law-firms-in-london-demand-70-hour-weeks-for-170000-salaries-plhbbq5j3

    Taking clients out to dinner doesn't count as work!
    Does shagging them?
    Rather depends on whether it's choice or duty, I suppose.
  • TimS said:

    Nigelb said:

    Some US restroom politics which didn't make many headlines.

    “Earlier this fall, a guerrilla marketing campaign started appearing on sticky notes in public restrooms around the country. ‘Woman to woman,’ read a representative message. ‘Your vote is private. #HarrisWalz2024.’”
    https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1853707935274119272

    I fear this sort of thing could be counterproductive, because it implies there was some doubt whether their votes actually are secret.

    Likewise the ads, which get people reflecting on whether they should lie to their spouses. Whereas before, they might just have walked up to the polling station and voted Harris without a moment’s thought.

    It’s like governments saying “vaccines work” or “the risk of a terrorist attack attach a tomorrow’s event is vanishingly small” or “we have no plans to raise tax”. Human psychology.
    There IS doubt that their vote is secret from controlling men. This campaign has resonated because of this reality.

    Note the outraged response on Fux News and from GOP mouthpieces. A wife not obeying her husband, in *lying* that they are obeying and then secretly *betraying their marriage vows* by secretly voting Harris.

    No wonder that women will deliver the election for Harris.
    Definitely agree.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    Using F-word at work is no sacking offence in the north, rules judge

    Delivery driver wins case for unfair dismissal despite calling female colleague a “f***ing mong” during an argument about her weight


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/using-f-word-at-work-is-no-sacking-offence-in-the-north-rules-judge-p7hnkz927

    They must be more to it. Calling someone a mong would normally a serious disciplinary offence, unless it was part of a banter (i know some say no such thing, but there is). Calling a customer such a thing has to be an immediate gross misconduct.
    Read the tribunal - it was wrong but the office was completely dysfunctional, HR appears to have been completely dysfunctional and it seems that a lot of evidence that would back up Mr Ogden wasn't included in the 300 pages of evidence that was provided at 9am on the morning of the case by Booker Ltd...

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    My analysis of the election has changed. If I had a vote, it would be for Trump.
    The defining issue for me is Ukraine. I don't think that the democrats can solve this and I think they will end up gradually losing the war in Ukraine, as the conflict continues on its current trajectory with no apparent strategic direction. This could cause the rapid collapse of more countries, and significant consequential damage.
    My gut feeling is that Trump would be more likely to find a strategic solution to the issue of conflict with Russia.
    This puts me at odds with almost everyone, including everyone I know in Finland, but it is my assessment of the situation. There is too much familiarity bias and continuity bias which fuels the assumption that Harris would preserve NATO and the European security arrangement.
    With Trump there is the possibility of an updated solution to the security question, there is a risk that this fails, but the current direction of travel seems to lead to failure anyway.
    I have this view even accepting that Trump is a significant threat to democracy itself. But I was influenced a lot by Niall Ferguson's recent comments.

    I hear you. For this and his antiWoke credentials I can see the appeal of Trump…

    … however for me the many downsides are just too much. His insane economic policies. His chaotic attacks on the western alliance. His likely revenge on Labour Britain (which will be fun to watch as it cripples Starmer but probably bad for UK PLC)

    So I hope Trump loses
    Here’s the opposite argument, eloquently put by an American Spectator columnist.

    https://x.com/bridgetphetasy/status/1852881275146703149

    In her mind the wokery and immigration outweigh the negatives. She says she’s not really voting *for* Trump, more like she’s voting against the Left.
    Hmmm. That is very persuasive

    I entirely agree with her analysis: ultimately the greatest, truly civilisational danger comes from the Left, the Dems, the Woke, Labour, all of these repulsive traitors

    However I return to my ice floe/polar bear analogy. You are trapped on an ice floe which is slowly heading into warmer waters, in time this will melt and you will drown, for sure - that is the awful drift into Woke madness and darkness

    However you are ALSO sharing the ice floe with a hungry polar bear. Trump is the polar bear and your vote is a gun

    As the polar bear will probably kill you in the next few minutes, not days or weeks, you have to shoot the polar bear first and THEN think about the whole melting ice floe thing
  • Pulpstar said:

    One thing about Trump, whoever has been doing his ads this time round has earnt their money. They are amazing next to the patronising dross the Harris campaign has put out.
    I think Harris is going to win, more comfortably than people expect though.

    I believe you are correct!
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    The first exit poll comes out at 10 PM our time .

    The two numbers that might give an idea of what’s going to happen .

    In 2020 the Edison exit poll showed the gender split 52 to 48 for women .

    In terms of ethnicity

    White 67
    Black 13
    Latino 13
    Asian 4
    Other 4

    The first exit poll might be a bit more older given younger people are more likely to vote later in the day ..
This discussion has been closed.