Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another debate, another victory for Hillary
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another debate, another victory for Hillary
The CNN/ORB instant post debate poll gives it to Clinton by 52% to 39%https://t.co/MYRI389v8l pic.twitter.com/33cNuEO7xK
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yep. Remain was a shoo in too :O
- a majority of polls in June had Leave ahead
- the expectation was that Leave would benefit from a big turnout (or a very small one).
- Remain's campaign was dreadful
By contrast, the evidence and reasoning in the US all points to Hillary:
- nearly all VI polling puts Hillary ahead
- Trump's approval ratings are far worse
- state polling reinforces the national trend
- Trump is still playing to the base and not seeking to gain independents or women
- Relying on new voters in a pre-existing format is an extremely tough ask (c.f. EURef)
- Early voting is taking place now, hard coding current opinion into the results
- Trump's character won't allow him to change tack
- The GOP is distancing itself as much as possible to mitigate damage; they expect him to lose
But I'm sorry; to say "Be careful what you look for" at the same time as posting "Trump is actually ahead or tied in three of the latest polls" does at the least suggest selective vision.
FWIW, the better comparison would be with GE2015, when the Tories outperformed all the polling but one firm (ICM?) consistently gave them leads of 3-6, which while still short, looked at the time like a methodological error. In fact, they were closest to being on the ball.
However, in that election, the subsidiary data suggested that there might be something wrong with the top line; in this one, it reinforces the impression that they're in synch.
Trump at 6/1 is ok value
To me the value looks to be in areas that go against trend. Ohio and Iowa for Trump, but also Georgia and Arizona for Clinton. Possibly also some value in a Clinton landslide too, Dems take Alabama...
I just wonder, that's all. Two or three polls e.g. the LA Times tracker have consistently shown the race as much tighter: in fact they tend to have Trump ahead or tied. They could be completely wrong and probably are.
It reminds me of 1992 when only one poll IIRC on the eve of election got it anywhere near correct. Following the majority of polls is only right if the majority of polls are right.
As if one presidential candidate self destructing was not enough to be going on with.....Hollande:
Friends in the Socialist Party, still hoping Mr Hollande might have a decent shot at a second term in April, are flabbergasted at the president's verbal carelessness. They fear it has already undermined his nascent campaign.
Others are more blunt. For more than one commentator, the book - called appropriately A President Should Not Say That - is little less than an act of "political suicide".
"How do you manage to turn your camp into a field of ruins, fill your friends with despair and your enemies with rejoicing, and weaken your own position just a little bit more?" asked Le Monde.
"Francois Hollande has found the recipe."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37702917
"Imagine burying your grandmother when she is still alive; that's roughly the ambience at party HQ," said another.
Was 1.02 as the returning officer got up to speak.
We might just lose a test to Bangladesh.
Dave Wasserman – Verified account @Redistrict
In 2012, 59.2% of GA's registered voters were white. Today, it's down to 57.2%. For 1st time, Gwinnett Co. electorate is majority nonwhite.
I blame Brexit and Theresa May
In 2012, 55% of registered voters in Gwinnett County, GA were white. In 2016, just 49% are. It really could go blue: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/clinton-trump-vote-maps-2016/ …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewey_Defeats_Truman?wprov=sfla1
There are big problems in the US at the moment. Without getting all SeanT over this, it's still the greatest country in the world, but other countries are yapping at its heels, wanting its place.
The problem is that Americans cannot agree on what the problems are, yet alone the solutions. They just have a nagging feeling that their rightful position is being threatened.
America being usurped by China and/or others is not inevitable. China itself faces significant problems. But America is being thrust forwards by inertia, not leadership. And four or eight years of Trump or Clinton won't fix this. Neither have the capability of bringing the country together.
I doubt their broken political system will allow such a leader to reach a position where they could do any good. Their political system is utterly broken, and the last system you would choose if you wanted real democracy.
Having said all that, I have little doubt that Trump would accelerate the rot. As such, Clinton is the best choice for America. Which in itself is a symbol of their malaise.
2. When my side are losing, badly, and I don't want to accept that there might be a cause (e.g. rampant Europhilia) for this.
Mr. Abroad, I forget who it was (perhaps Polybius) but someone said something along the lines that democracy became mob rule when the electorate realised they could simply vote themselves largesse taken from the wealthy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37708335
This has progressively made the country ungovernable and deeply divided. It also means the choices for President tend to play to the base of their party rather than reaching out. Clinton tried to run a pretty centralist campaign and it meant that she could not shake off someone as daft as Bernie for months. Trump didn't and that is one of the reasons he is going to lose.
We have the same problem here to some extent. Safe seats are fundamentally undemocratic and destabilising.
'FPT,
As if one presidential candidate self destructing was not enough to be going on with.....Hollande:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37702917
Wait for all the screams of 'racist' from the left when they read his comments about immigrants & Islam,surprised we haven't heard from Corbyn and Momentum aren't already doing a demo outside the French Embassy.
In the absence of a NoJam PB contest, I am predicting a safe Con hold, with over 50% of the vote. LDs on 25% and Lab on 12%.
Extinction level events for the Tories & Labour?
The empire, long divided, must unite. The empire, long united, must divide.
There are a few potential challenges it faces. Throwing its weight around militarily in the South China Sea and a possible islands clash with Japan will have significant consequences. Will the US et al. stand up to China as it grabs resources from the sea bed?
It seems too late already.
We are looking at the flipside of globalisation, where the rich look more like each other whether in London, California, Shanghai and Mumbai, and the mob look like each other too, whether in Ohio or Kyiv.
While every England player has a first class century , I believe, they weren't made in these conditions.
And England's spinners need a decent total to impose some pressure; without that, they could get hammered.
The UK became a world power by innovating and creating new industries. The US did the same, embracing change and using their massive resources to accelerate it.
Russia did not innovate as much, and never managed to approach the US in non-military power. China is not innovating much: they are in the perfect place to produce innovative, disruptive industries but they're still mostly coming from the US and the west.
Take SpaceX as an example. There is no reason China could not have tried to produce a disruptive reusable launcher. Instead, they just copied and improved on what the Russians had done. They've probably spent much more on their program, arguably for less.
Copying and incremental improvements can only get you so far.
Hilary, despite being in the Whitehouse during a totally scandal hit 8 years, despite being the author of the failed healthcare reforms of the late 90's, despite a long history of proven dishonesty, despite Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, leaked emails and the lasting smell of Whitewater - is somehow the best candidate democrat money can buy.
And she's up against a bull headed know nothing businessman with a habit in young women, a loose tongue, sexual encounters of a nefarious nature and the policy experience of a two year old.
What's worse is that the two year old has the better policies and the dishonest machine politician looks clean by comparison to her odd ball opponent. The world's on its head.
Neither of them are even great speakers, at least Obama had rhetorical flair.
(As an allegory - spell check just tried to correct Whitehouse to Whorehouse!)
May as well be renamed "Leftovers"
The issue is masked by the fact that things are still very nice for most Americans most of the time. The normal American experience is a busy life with friendly neighbo(u)rs, reasonable prosperity and no major threats. So people have a nagging feeling that all is not well, as you say, but it's a minority who are really furious.
Then 60%.
At some point it makes more sense to bet with bookmakers at lower odds, if they'll take your bets.
Another fine performance from Clinton. This is so over.
"Better policies"... the Wall; extreme vetting; winning bigly ... ?
"clean by comparison" ... really ?
I'm not a fan of Clinton at all (though I hope she'll prove a competent president), but I can't see that Trump beats her on any metric.
538's three models are currently showing Trump's chances at 12-15%, which is smaller than the betting markets imply. I wouldn't have much faith in the numerical accuracy of those models, but I'd have even less faith in a gut feeling that the figure should be 5 or 10 percent higher.
He's been involved in more reviews in this innings than Shane Watson manages in an entire Ashes series
Is she also taking responsibility for the rise of ISIS on her watch?
It's in Broxtowe borough, though just on the edge of my former constituency, so I'm a reasonably familiar figure there and know the town pretty well: I used to live nearby. It's part of the new Broxtowe and Hucknall constituency which Anna Soubry is likely to contest if the boundary changes go through, but for the time being it's part of Gloria de Piero's constituency.
I have no idea how it will turn out, but it'll be good to be back in harness. The County Council is an interesting one politically as Labour won a majoity of 1 last time. First regional BBC TV interview is tomorrow.
"Well we can all cherry pick to our prejudices but in toto nothing good comes of that series of interviews."
Because Hollande has said what he thinks? Sad, but a testament to the state of politics. Truth is bad, prevarication is good.
Jezza may be a complete bonehead but his saving grace used to be his honesty (not so much now). That's what started the surge.
Trump's another one in that category.
In a way, I admire Hollande more now (admittedly from a low base). And it may chime more with the French electorate than you think.
http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2016-10-19/swindon-councillor-defects-to-conservatives-after-5-months-with-labour/
Perhaps by the weekend he will have become a Lib Dem.
But if you changed your comment to "Representative democracy only works when people are better off this decade than they were last", then there's much more in it. Even then, I think it takes time to break down but the longer the current system is seen as not working "for me" and where there are enough "me"s, then the greater the chances that people will look outside the democratic box.
Nothing, on a geopolitical level, is inevitable.
Still should be higher, though....
it's 'would behove you well' rather than 'behoove you well', isn't it?