Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Your timetable for this historic day

November 8th 2016 (all times GMT)
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLERzuzgOaY
When people whine about Republican gerrymandering they should remember this.
Sacremento changes the rules to have an "open primary" where both parties vote in the same election and only the top 2 candidates get to participate in the election.
They did this to explicitly to disenfrancish Orange County which - even in 2008 and 2012 - had an absolute majority for the GOP but isn't allowed to vote for anyone apart from a Democrat this time round.
How it's has voted down the years:
1960: Nixon 9, Kennedy 0.
1964: Goldwater 8, Johnson 1.
1968: Humphrey 8, Nixon 4.
1972: Nixon 16, McGovern 3.
1976: Ford 13, Carter 11, McCarthy 1.
1980: Reagan 17, Carter 3, Anderson 2, Clark 1.
1984: Reagan 29, Mondale 1.
1988: Bush 34, Dukakis 3, Kemp 1.
1992: Bush 15, Perot 8, Marrou 5, Clinton 2.
1996: Dole 18, Clinton 8, Perot 1, Browne 1.
2000: Bush 21, Gore 5, Nader 1.
2004: Bush 19, Kerry 7.
2008: Obama 15, McCain 6.
2012: Obama 5, Romney 5.
Putin write in 5 - Jamie Dimon write in 5.
Harambe 2.
http://www.livenewson.com/american/cnn-news-usa.html
4 votes still to be counted...
(sunderland would be done by now...)
Trump 2
Johnson 1
Romney (write-in) 1
I'm intrigued by the high number of abstentions/no show though. There were 10 votes:
4 clinton
2 trump
1 abstention
3 no shows
Josh Jordan – Verified account @NumbersMuncher
Mitt Romney currently has 12.5% of the vote in Dixville Notch... which just goes to show how completely screwed the Republican party is.
Clinton 17
Trump 14
Johnson 3
Sanders 2
Result from Millsfield, New Hampshire:
Trump 16
Clinton 4
Sanders 1
It's just a modified from of FPTP, which I believe you're a big fan of. In any case, the very red state of Louisiana uses the same system so it balances out.
Trump 32 Clinton 25
2012:
Obama 28 Romney 14
Perhaps its NOT all over
Hart's Location election results 2012: Obama 23, Romney 9
So actually
Notch - good for Clinton
Harts - Good for Trump
Millsfield - Same
Overall +ve for Trump maybe
And from memory (t'Economist many, many, many moons ago) the only US state with the right to leave 'the Union' is Maine. Following the War of 1812 the UK returned northeastern Massachusetts - a loyalist stronghold - back to the Septics: Maine then sought succession from the Boston [MODERATED]!
So Maine may leave the USA but only on condition that the state returns to The Crown. One for Canada to monitor....
"We used to make cars in Flint and you couldn't drink the water in Mexico. Now they make cars in Mexico and you can't drink the water in Flint."
This, along with Clinton's own unpopularity, is the reason why a candidate like Donald Trump can capture in excess of 40% of the popular vote. It's also why, even if he loses this time around, we shouldn't assume that somebody running on a very similar platform (only without the misogyny, and with less strident rhetoric about Mexico) can't win the next time around.
So about 60% of the votes should equal 100% of the seats? And c. 40% of the voters not even getting the chance to vote for a party of their choice?
I think it is outrageous that a party is prevented from standing a candidate in a general election.
But what Trump has shown is, first, that the GOP establishment has just as big a sense of entitlement as Hillary Clinton, and its scions are equally poor at campaigning; second, and more importantly, that the appeal of Tea Partiers and Ted Cruz is not their policies but their outsider status.
Taken together, there is room next time for a decent GOP campaigner who is neither extremist nor bat-shit crazy.
Say Your Prez
US Politics - Say Your Prez
Trump Wins & Declares War On Mexico
Stake
£10.00
Odds
1846/1
Bet Cost
£10.00
Potential Return
£18,470.00
Not likely to happen, but not 1846/1 either.
I'm no fan of FPTP abut it's odd to see people who think it's fine for Westminster criticise essentially the same system in a different election.
A proper run off system (like France) is fine although I don't like the delay. This isn't that.
Anyway I wouldn't price that above 500/1. Worth noting it's a treble;
1 Trump wins.
2 Declares war on mexico.
3 Murdoch keeps his bookie open long enough to pay out.
Anyway, busy at work (with good things in the offing and people I need to continue impressing) and a choice of viewing- do I go to my friend's party and stay up late, or do I stay home go to bed really early then get up around 2am?
Of course, AV would be a far better system (no joke) to use here.
That said, I don't know how you write in on voting machines? Is it easier to do in New Hampshire?
Edit: See your point. They'd go to war, not declare war.
There should be no restricting on who wants to stand as a candidate in the full election. I don't like second round systems and especially not those that are designed to limit the choice of the voters to a single party.
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/05/the_gop_screwed_themselves_the_brilliant_gerrymander_that_gave_republicans_the_congress_and_created_donald_trump/
Any other GOP candidate would have been between 1/5 and evens vs. Hillary on the day of the election, IMO.
ANY other candidate.
Even the thoroughly unlikeable Ted Cruz would have run HRC close.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
The GOP will never win nationally again.