It strikes me that both Trump and Brexit share one particular demand in common: a New Deal.
It isn't about free trade versus protectionism in the extreme; it's about selective free trade with similar nations competing on level terms and who will not indulge in under-cutting.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
The Democrats have only themselves to blame for selecting Hillary Clinton, and the resulting collapse in their vote.
It was pretty obvious that there was always a big danger of the Democrats piling up useless votes in California, New York, etc. while narrowly losing Wisconsin and Michigan, but amazingly they didn't see the danger.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
The Democrats have only themselves to blame for selecting Hillary Clinton, and the resulting collapse in their vote.
It was pretty obvious that there was always a big danger of the Democrats piling up useless votes in California, New York, etc. while narrowly losing Wisconsin and Michigan, but amazingly they didn't see the danger.
This happens every 4 years.
Yes but not usually to the extent of losing the election, apart from 2000.
He did say that, that's true. But he also gave one number rather than a spread..
He most certainly didn't. He spent the entire electoral period (and the electoral periods of 2012 and 2008) publishing histograms of the probability distribution from his model, and giving a central forecast of vote leads with error bars both for the national picture and individual states.
I summarised the probability distribution here several times last week, the final one here:
OGH says: "Normally bookies only ever tell us when they have lost almost never when they have won."
As a non-punter I am fascinated. My impression on the other hand is that gamblers often speak of their winnings, but not of their losses. This obverse makes sense of course.
Indeed - it seems a remarkable coincidence that on here after any big betting event we always have posters reporting their winnings but almost nobody comes on to talk about their losses.
And when there is a surprise result surely more people have lost than won?
What happened to all the people who said Clinton was about to go to 1.01 around 1am (when Luntz called it for Clinton)? How much money was lost on Clinton at around 1.2?
What about the various bets on Clinton seat bands which were talked about as being likely winners?
If every single person posting on here who bet on last night had to declare their result there must surely have been more losers than winners.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
but lump it in with the 300 odd other safe seats and it represents half the population.
It is admission time once again. A few days ago I posted that I had lost all interest in the Presidential race as Hillary Clinton was going to walk it. In the spirit of that declaration I told my good lady that I was going to sleep through to the morning as I had no reason to want to listen to a foregone conclusion.
Well as happens at my time of life I needed a bathroom call at about 2.30am and being unable to resist the temptation I checked the position on my smart phone, and at that moment in time , I was back to Brexit. Transfixed I didn't leave the media until 1.00pm lunchtime when I decided to have a rest.
Just as with Brexit where I voted remain I was so wrong and maybe those of you on this forum will now realise that I decided years ago I would be no good at betting
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
Will Trump tell the Israel lobby where to get off? I doubt it.
Agree with that. Trump will sup with the vile Netanyahu.
Obama's Foreign Policy was by far his greatest negative. He left America much weaker, and less respected, than we he first took office.
Surely not, he's a Peace Prize winner!
In all seriousness I have no particular problems with Obama, but that prize was such a joke, even recognising it can be about attempts at Peace as much as successes.
It is admission time once again. A few days ago I posted that I had lost all interest in the Presidential race as Hillary Clinton was going to walk it. In the spirit of that declaration I told my good lady that I was going to sleep through to the morning as I had no reason to want to listen to a foregone conclusion.
Well as happens at my time of life I needed a bathroom call at about 2.30am and being unable to resist the temptation I checked the position on my smart phone, and at that moment in time , I was back to Brexit. Transfixed I didn't leave the media until 1.00pm lunchtime when I decided to have a rest.
Just as with Brexit where I voted remain I was so wrong and maybe those of you on this forum will now realise that I decided years ago I would be no good at betting
I hope you enjoyed the remainder of the evening! It was a wild ride!!
The idea of 'contributions' in terms of Europe takes a twist.
We are big defence spenders.
As a rough estimate there is about a 70-90bn euro gap in spending to get it up to the right levels. Is that even realistically possible to close right now?
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
I have beef with Putin. Deliberately bombing hospitals and markets in Syria and killing thousands of civilians in the process just to cause diplomatic trouble makes him just about the nastiest of murderous tyrants in the world at the moment.
Not that we have clean hands. But at least we try to minimize not maximize death.
The idea of 'contributions' in terms of Europe takes a twist.
We are big defence spenders.
As a rough estimate there is about a 70-90bn euro gap to get spending up to the right levels. Is that even realistically possible right now?
I find this debate puzzling. On the one hand, we are reportedly told that Russia has the GDP of Belgium. But then NATO as a whole cannot stump up enough to match Russia.
I think the Military Industrial Complex is having a laugh.
No, my vote was rational and well thought through as I'm sure you know.
But no-one will be more pleased than I to see the EU gets its comeuppance for its contempt for democracy and its insufferable arrogance.
There must be EU leaders who are bricking it tonight.
Why ? It is the dollar which is tanking.
Judging by their panic responses today including the European Commission it looks like they have been bricking it all day and as this develops with Trump and Farage extolling Brexit it is only going to get worse for them
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Good point. Do you think California or New York would do that unilaterally now ? Texas could be interesting soon. The Democrats might lose the rust belt but gain Texas in 2024. Maybe Georgia too. They will possibly win Arizona in 2020.
He should never have accepted the Prize. A total joke. It devalued the Nobels, and him, in one stroke. Pfff.
The decision to award was barely months into his presidency as I recall - too soon to justify it even on the basis of 'he's made a real effort'. President Santos of Colombia put in years of effort for a peace deal and just barely failed to sell it to his people, but his intent could be seen at least as more than words.
The idea of 'contributions' in terms of Europe takes a twist.
We are big defence spenders.
As a rough estimate there is about a 70-90bn euro gap to get spending up to the right levels. Is that even realistically possible right now?
I find this debate puzzling. On the one hand, we are reportedly told that Russia has the GDP of Belgium. But then NATO as a whole cannot stump up enough to match Russia.
I think the Military Industrial Complex is having a laugh.
I've often had similar thoughts. Is it as bad as it seems or do we just spend the money really poorly? (that it is poorly spent is undoubted, but is it as bad as it seems)
It is admission time once again. A few days ago I posted that I had lost all interest in the Presidential race as Hillary Clinton was going to walk it. In the spirit of that declaration I told my good lady that I was going to sleep through to the morning as I had no reason to want to listen to a foregone conclusion.
Well as happens at my time of life I needed a bathroom call at about 2.30am and being unable to resist the temptation I checked the position on my smart phone, and at that moment in time , I was back to Brexit. Transfixed I didn't leave the media until 1.00pm lunchtime when I decided to have a rest.
Just as with Brexit where I voted remain I was so wrong and maybe those of you on this forum will now realise that I decided years ago I would be no good at betting
My father used to say, he was very good at forecasting outcomes - as long as he didn't bet on them.
It is admission time once again. A few days ago I posted that I had lost all interest in the Presidential race as Hillary Clinton was going to walk it. In the spirit of that declaration I told my good lady that I was going to sleep through to the morning as I had no reason to want to listen to a foregone conclusion.
Well as happens at my time of life I needed a bathroom call at about 2.30am and being unable to resist the temptation I checked the position on my smart phone, and at that moment in time , I was back to Brexit. Transfixed I didn't leave the media until 1.00pm lunchtime when I decided to have a rest.
Just as with Brexit where I voted remain I was so wrong and maybe those of you on this forum will now realise that I decided years ago I would be no good at betting
I hope you enjoyed the remainder of the evening! It was a wild ride!!
It was history in the making and the good thing, much like Brexit, it wasn't until about 2.30am that things started hotting up
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Good point. Do you think California or New York would do that unilaterally now ? Texas could be interesting soon. The Democrats might lose the rust belt but gain Texas in 2024. Maybe Georgia too. They will possibly win Arizona in 2020.
Not sure the whole business of elections is very politicized in the US. Can't see any state legislatures coming up with the necessary legislation in a bipartisan idea of fairness when it might stop their man from winning every 4 years.
At the moment Trump has 10 million votes fewer than Obama got when he was first elected in 2008. 69.5m vs 59.6m. The US population is 20 million higher now than then.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Richard Nabavi (I think) gave one of the best tips of the Campaign with the HC vote on 47-49.99%. I made a bit on that, but it would have paid out too with anything short of a landslide.
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
Will Trump tell the Israel lobby where to get off? I doubt it.
Agree with that. Trump will sup with the vile Netanyahu.
Obama's Foreign Policy was by far his greatest negative. He left America much weaker, and less respected, than we he first took office.
Surely not, he's a Peace Prize winner!
In all seriousness I have no particular problems with Obama, but that prize was such a joke, even recognising it can be about attempts at Peace as much as successes.
Wasn't Obama's NPP received for being 'inspirational' in becoming President rather than for anything he had done as President ?
He did say that, that's true. But he also gave one number rather than a spread..
He most certainly didn't. He spent the entire electoral period (and the electoral periods of 2012 and 2008) publishing histograms of the probability distribution from his model, and giving a central forecast of vote leads with error bars both for the national picture and individual states.
I summarised the probability distribution here several times last week, the final one here:
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Richard Nabavi (I think) gave one of the best tips of the Campaign with the HC vote on 47-49.99%. I made a bit on that, but it would have paid out too with anything short of a landslide.
I don't think that was me. I did suggest a bet on a Clinton lead of 0-5%, which looks to be a winner @ 2.625.
Before I depart I just wanted to say that last night's experience left an unpleasant taste in my mouth.
No not Trump's win - I mean drinking Limoncello.
Ha, ha.
Was disappointed by BBC graphics, they really do need to think carefully about the presentation with Jeremy Vine, too much hand waving.
Re coverage, there does seem to be a problem covering US elections, New York City isn't New York State, and I guess that trying to gauge opinions and reactions to candidates outside the largest cities is time consuming and expensive.
I listened to BBC 1 whilst revisiting Twitter and CNN's election pages. CNN had rolling totals for each county in each state. It was very impressive.
' The income gap between the richest 1% of Americans and the other 99% widened to a record margin in 2012, according to an analysis of tax filings.
While the crash of 2007-09 adversely affected top earners, benefits of rising corporate profits and stock prices since then have largely gone to the richest, according to the study.
Incomes among the richest fell more than 36% between 2007-09, compared with a decrease of 11.6% for the rest of Americans. But in the last three years, 95% of all income gains have gone to the richest 1%. '
At the moment Trump has 10 million votes fewer than Obama got when he was first elected in 2008. 69.5m vs 59.6m. The US population is 20 million higher now than then.
Trump has about the same votes as Romney, McCain and Kerry.
Great to see the little love in of the pbCOM facist scumbags....(pbTory...is no longer fit for purpose since no Tories actually came out for Trump.)...you lot here are much worse.
I'll come back to see how excited you are about about LePen....good riddance until them you vile people.....
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Good point. Do you think California or New York would do that unilaterally now ? Texas could be interesting soon. The Democrats might lose the rust belt but gain Texas in 2024. Maybe Georgia too. They will possibly win Arizona in 2020.
Not sure the whole business of elections is very politicized in the US. Can't see any state legislatures coming up with the necessary legislation in a bipartisan idea of fairness when it might stop their man from winning every 4 years.
And given how gerrymandered the congressional districts are it would most likely continue to give perverse outcomes.
Is this the first election in which Maine has split its votes?
I've actually done a bit better than I thought. Apparently in by 1am tiredness stupor inlaid off £100 of my Trump liability at 10s so only lost 200 on Trump. As my Stein bet will come in all my state bets and the national popular vote bet will be profit rather than making up the loss so I will be about +£100.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Good point. Do you think California or New York would do that unilaterally now ? Texas could be interesting soon. The Democrats might lose the rust belt but gain Texas in 2024. Maybe Georgia too. They will possibly win Arizona in 2020.
Not sure the whole business of elections is very politicized in the US. Can't see any state legislatures coming up with the necessary legislation in a bipartisan idea of fairness when it might stop their man from winning every 4 years.
Worse than the EC, are the boundaries for the HoR - totally gerrymandered. I do not know the full details from yesterday, but Democrats routinely win by a huge number of votes and are not even competing for the HoR.
Wasn't Obama's NPP received for being 'inspirational' in becoming President rather than for anything he had done as President ?
I don't recall the specifics but it was either that or for some nice sounding speeches on war issues shortly after becoming president, since it was announced in Oct 2009, he was only president from January 2009, and undoubtedly they must decide on who gets it months in advance.
At least one person has apparently declined the Peace Prize according to wiki.
I'm now licking my wounds and checking profit and loss. What do we think the final turnout band will be?
It'll probably be around 55% again.
Thanks, yes, that's what I thought. I'm on the 54% to 57.99% band so I'll provisionally put that in the win column.
I'd be surprised if it isn't within that band.
Isn't it the case that with turnout much the same, it was as much shy Dems staying home as shy Trumpers turning out which flipped the key states?
I think the FBI intervention at the height of early voting that was the critical event in the last weeks, more so than any rallies. Tbe story behind all tbat will come out at some point.
Worse than the EC, are the boundaries for the HoR - totally gerrymandered. I do not know the full details from yesterday, but Democrats routinely win by a huge number of votes and are not even competing for the HoR.
Lord knows ours are not perfect, but even accepting I've probably only seen the worst examples of gerrymandered districts, they can get pretty ridiculous over there.
I'm now licking my wounds and checking profit and loss. What do we think the final turnout band will be?
It'll probably be around 55% again.
Thanks, yes, that's what I thought. I'm on the 54% to 57.99% band so I'll provisionally put that in the win column.
I'd be surprised if it isn't within that band.
Isn't it the case that with turnout much the same, it was as much shy Dems staying home as shy Trumpers turning out which flipped the key states?
I think the FBI intervention at the height of early voting that was the critical event in the last weeks, more so than any rallies. Tbe story behind all tbat will come out at some point.
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
Will Trump tell the Israel lobby where to get off? I doubt it.
Agree with that. Trump will sup with the vile Netanyahu.
Mind you, one of Obama's GREATEST failures was his lack of spine when it came to Israel. He was the first POTUS who had the charisma, nous, independence and mandate to tell the American-Israeli lobby to fuck off, and sort out a two state solution. He did nothing but whinge. Barely tried.
Obama's Foreign Policy was by far his greatest negative. He left America much weaker, and less respected, than when he first took office.
IS is his legacy (though fortunately local forces in Iraq and Syria seem to be on the offensive against the Caliphate).
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
I have beef with Putin. Deliberately bombing hospitals and markets in Syria and killing thousands of civilians in the process just to cause diplomatic trouble makes him just about the nastiest of murderous tyrants in the world at the moment.
Not that we have clean hands. But at least we try to minimize not maximize death.
"The American experiment may be over Trump is the country's id: the desire of the moment, the impulse that must be gratified, untroubled by reason or reality
A very good article from April, I think it's been posted here before.
Here's a line that was, in retrospect, quite prescient:
"Faced with the prospect of an election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the smug will reach a fever pitch: six straight months of a sure thing, an opportunity to mock and scoff and ask, How could anybody vote for this guy? until a morning in November when they ask, What the fuck happened?"
Great to see the little love in of the pbCOM facist scumbags....(pbTory...is no longer fit for purpose since no Tories actually came out for Trump.)...you lot here are much worse.
I'll come back to see how excited you are about about LePen....good riddance until them you vile people.....
Same time tomorrow then?
And to make Tyson's day even worse it looks like some of his taxes will be heading towards Ronald McDonald's bank account:
' McDonald's is suing Florence for €18m after it was blocked from opening a restaurant on one of the Italian city's most historic plazas.
The fast-food giant had its plans for an outlet on the Piazza del Duomo rejected by Florence's mayor in June.
The decision was upheld in July by a technical panel in charge of preserving the city's ancient heart.
But McDonald's, which modified its proposals to fit with city guidelines, has now launched a bid for damages.
The chain is claiming it has been discriminated against, and wants to recoup the €17.8m (£15.9m; $19.7m) it estimates it will lose over the next 18 years, according to Italian newspaper Firenze Today. '
I've actually done a bit better than I thought. Apparently in by 1am tiredness stupor inlaid off £100 of my Trump liability at 10s so only lost 200 on Trump. As my Stein bet will come in all my state bets and the national popular vote bet will be profit rather than making up the loss so I will be about +£100.
Which is better than a kick in the teeth.
Yep, a profit is a profit. Well done.
I'm also pleasantly surprised, having done the full sums. Subject to final confirmation on a couple of small bets, I think I'm £419 in profit overall, despite making a serious contribution to the Sporting Index Xmas Party. I'm still kicking myself for screwing up last night when I could have closed off on the spreads and saved myself a tidy sum if I'd been quicker, but a profit is a profit!
Faisal Islam, Sky suggesting that there will be an early invitation to the new POTUS to no 10.
He went on to say 'Some in government think they have just been dealt the Brexit Trump card'
The European leaders have been very churlish today and not really done themselves any favours.
Trump is seeking 2% defence spending into the pot from all Nato members for him to continue protecting them within Nato.
Of course UK is the only other Nato member committed to the 2%.
With the UK leaving the EU and the hole in the EU's finances a large scale increase in funding of Nato will be 'popcorn time'
Bullshit ! Trump is in line to become the next failed politician.
He will be remembered for NOT building the wall. [ Actually building a useless wall might boost the Mexican economy ].
How is he going to bring back factories to the rust belt ? Press a button ?
Your comments have nothing to say about Brexit and Nato.
Would be interested if you agree that EU countries will need to make their defence spending up to the 2% each towards Nato spending as demanded by Trump
No. Putin is our friend now. Trump may even ask him to join Nato. The South China Sea is where the action is. And Philippines, Malaysia are hanging out with China !!!
I have no beef with Putin. If he wants to conquer a quasi-Fascist Ukraine, what do I care.
He's better than Erdogan, our supposed ally, who is an actual Islamist, and who covertly supports ISIS, who in turn want to slaughter us all. Putin BOMBS Isis.
Likewise Saudi, our other supposed allies. Why are the Saudis good and Putin bad?
Russia is the peak of civilisation compared to the hideousness of Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump's presidency might sweep away much of this canting nonsense.
Will Trump tell the Israel lobby where to get off? I doubt it.
Agree with that. Trump will sup with the vile Netanyahu.
Mind you, one of Obama's GREATEST failures was his lack of spine when it came to Israel. He was the first POTUS who had the charisma, nous, independence and mandate to tell the American-Israeli lobby to fuck off, and sort out a two state solution. He did nothing but whinge. Barely tried.
Obama's Foreign Policy was by far his greatest negative. He left America much weaker, and less respected, than when he first took office.
There will be no Palestinian state now. West Bank is more or less gone.
Unlike Obama, the only global leader who just unilaterally drones his enemies?
Even Hillary said, "why can't we just drone this guy" of Assange. US presidents assume the imperial right to assassinate, or vapourise, anyone in the world they don't like, as long as it's in a country that won't or can't complain.
America killed thousands in Iraq, Putin kills thousands in Syria. Neither country was or is directly threatened. It's all bollocks. We have virtually no moral superiority any more. That is the problem.
America is responsible for the deaths in Syria. If it hadn't attempted its 'Arab Spring', the Sunni uprising in Syria would never have happened, and Syria would still be a charming holiday destination with an ok-if-you-don't-get-on-the-wrong-side-of-them ruling family.
I'm now licking my wounds and checking profit and loss. What do we think the final turnout band will be?
It'll probably be around 55% again.
Thanks, yes, that's what I thought. I'm on the 54% to 57.99% band so I'll provisionally put that in the win column.
I'd be surprised if it isn't within that band.
Isn't it the case that with turnout much the same, it was as much shy Dems staying home as shy Trumpers turning out which flipped the key states?
I think the FBI intervention at the height of early voting that was the critical event in the last weeks, more so than any rallies. Tbe story behind all tbat will come out at some point.
Looks that way, yes.
A bit like the Tory stay at homes in 1997,at the end of a time expired government, but unable to stomach the alternative.
Do you have a rank order of states by turnout? One thing that puzzles me is that in safe states (or safe seats here) the turnout is much the same as in marginals, despite all the focus on leaflets and GOTV. The ground game is pretty marginal at best.
Unpaid twitter rampers like Plato are the new canvassing, and no need to stick to accuracy.
Worse than the EC, are the boundaries for the HoR - totally gerrymandered. I do not know the full details from yesterday, but Democrats routinely win by a huge number of votes and are not even competing for the HoR.
Lord knows ours are not perfect, but even accepting I've probably only seen the worst examples of gerrymandered districts, they can get pretty ridiculous over there.
Try the top 3 here for size! And people moan about our Boundary commissions moving one side of the street from one constituency to another.
Real Charlie Sykes – Verified account @SykesCharlie
Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401
In fact, that is true for most of the US. It now seems Romney got more votes than Trump.
Yep, Trump is heading for the infamous 47% that Romney received in 2012. Hillary Clinton looks like getting at least 48%. What a system.
Yes but everyone knew it was by popular vote, then safe states wouldn't exist. Voting would be different anyway.
True. We also have a system of 650 electoral college votes ! But what kind of a system is it that no candidate visits California, Texas, New York, Illinois >
OK , they will visit PA, WI, MI for the next three cycles. I think GA, AZ and TX will come into the frame. The Dems won NV quite easily as they did CO.
The same kind of system that meant in Birmingham Perry Barr I got about 3 election communications and not a single canvasser knocking on my door in last year's general election. Ask OGH how many he had.
True. Except Perry Barr does not house a ninth of the British population. CA, TX, NY, IL together has a population of 95m out of 308m.
But you can say that Newcastle, Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester and most of Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, etc get totally ignored.
and at the time the constitution was framed candidates would not have been expected to visit any of the states. Still it could have a modest overhaul which would not require any constitutional amendment by every state changing its apportionment of electors to that of Maine and Nebraska.
Good point. Do you think California or New York would do that unilaterally now ? Texas could be interesting soon. The Democrats might lose the rust belt but gain Texas in 2024. Maybe Georgia too. They will possibly win Arizona in 2020.
Not sure the whole business of elections is very politicized in the US. Can't see any state legislatures coming up with the necessary legislation in a bipartisan idea of fairness when it might stop their man from winning every 4 years.
And given how gerrymandered the congressional districts are it would most likely continue to give perverse outcomes.
Is this the first election in which Maine has split its votes?
Have to publicly apologise to Dromedary for doubting his claim to winning a near six figure sum , having had photographic evidence I have to congratulate him and eat lots of humble pie. A brave man indeed.
Thanks for the apology, MalcolmG, which is accepted!
56m (((Harry Enten))) @ForecasterEnten In Pennsylvania's Cambria County (home to John Murtha), Hillary Clinton lost by 38 points. Bill Clinton won it by 17 in 1996.
' Irish bookmakers Paddy Power are paying out to customers who backed Hillary Clinton to win the US election, three weeks before Americans go to the polls.
The bookmakers are paying out over £800,000, gambling on Donald Trump’s election campaign being all but finished. '
On NATO, the NATO Europe ex UK shortfall is €116bn per year, will Europe really be willing to plug such a huge gap?
If Trump is true to his word they will have no choice or leave Nato and set up their own army. No wonder they are 'bricking' it
A Nato consisting of just the 2%ers would be interesting. Just us the Yanks, the Turks, the Greeks and tbe Estonians.
Not sure that I would be willing to fight for that!
Winding up NATO is long overdue, it is well past its sell by date. We should take control and leave.
That could well be true, but imagine you were Polish and at home in Poland.
How would you feel without NATO facing the Russians? How would you feel about re-arming the Germans to deal with it?
That is the reasoning behind the EU army. Integrated forces do not carry that risk.
Worth bearing in mind that the rEU has a GDP of about 7 times Russia in PPP terms. 1% of EU spending is 7% of Russia's, and with only one border to defend. Russia could invade the Baltics or Poland, but would leave with its tail between its legs quickly enough.
Russia struggles to mount more than an exeditionary force in Syria without scaling back efforts elsewhere. If Trumpistan pulls out of NATO, an rEU defence arrangement with China may well work very well at holding the bear at bay.
Comments
It isn't about free trade versus protectionism in the extreme; it's about selective free trade with similar nations competing on level terms and who will not indulge in under-cutting.
I summarised the probability distribution here several times last week, the final one here:
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1332093/#Comment_1332093
Note that he was giving a probability of Clinton under 250 of 25%. I thought that looked too high, but I was wrong and he was right.
Well as happens at my time of life I needed a bathroom call at about 2.30am and being unable to resist the temptation I checked the position on my smart phone, and at that moment in time , I was back to Brexit. Transfixed I didn't leave the media until 1.00pm lunchtime when I decided to have a rest.
Just as with Brexit where I voted remain I was so wrong and maybe those of you on this forum will now realise that I decided years ago I would be no good at betting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1976
Rep gain OH, WI, MO, WV, KT, TN, AK, LO, TX, MS, AL, FL, SC, NC, FL
Dem gain CA, OR, WA, NV, NM, CO, VI, IL, NJ, NH, VT, CT, MN
In all seriousness I have no particular problems with Obama, but that prize was such a joke, even recognising it can be about attempts at Peace as much as successes.
It is now coming out that, in totality, the Hispanic vote was covered by WWC [ or rather the Angry White Vote - AWV ].
It was the distribution which won him the vote. Mainly, WI, MI and PA. NC and FL really did not matter.
Once these results become the norm, then they seem more likely to repeat.
The new norm is becoming big, important nations throwing out insipid europhiles and 'progressives'.
Not that we have clean hands. But at least we try to minimize not maximize death.
I think the Military Industrial Complex is having a laugh.
No not Trump's win - I mean drinking Limoncello.
One of his writers put this piece out: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-trump-could-win-the-white-house-while-losing-the-popular-vote/
Was disappointed by BBC graphics, they really do need to think carefully about the presentation with Jeremy Vine, too much hand waving.
Re coverage, there does seem to be a problem covering US elections, New York City isn't New York State, and I guess that trying to gauge opinions and reactions to candidates outside the largest cities is time consuming and expensive.
I listened to BBC 1 whilst revisiting Twitter and CNN's election pages. CNN had rolling totals for each county in each state. It was very impressive.
' The income gap between the richest 1% of Americans and the other 99% widened to a record margin in 2012, according to an analysis of tax filings.
While the crash of 2007-09 adversely affected top earners, benefits of rising corporate profits and stock prices since then have largely gone to the richest, according to the study.
Incomes among the richest fell more than 36% between 2007-09, compared with a decrease of 11.6% for the rest of Americans. But in the last three years, 95% of all income gains have gone to the richest 1%. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24039202
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
Is this the first election in which Maine has split its votes?
Which is better than a kick in the teeth.
At least one person has apparently declined the Peace Prize according to wiki.
I think the FBI intervention at the height of early voting that was the critical event in the last weeks, more so than any rallies. Tbe story behind all tbat will come out at some point.
Should have laid off McMullin. Stupid silly me
Not sure that I would be willing to fight for that!
Winding up NATO is long overdue, it is well past its sell by date. We should take control and leave.
Replace one FL with a GE:
Rep gain OH, WI, MO, WV, KT, TN, AK, LO, TX, MS, AL, FL, SC, NC, GE
Trump is the country's id: the desire of the moment, the impulse that must be gratified, untroubled by reason or reality
by Diane Roberts"
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/the-american-experiment-may-be-over-donald-trump
A very good article from April, I think it's been posted here before.
Here's a line that was, in retrospect, quite prescient:
"Faced with the prospect of an election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the smug will reach a fever pitch: six straight months of a sure thing, an opportunity to mock and scoff and ask, How could anybody vote for this guy? until a morning in November when they ask, What the fuck happened?"
' McDonald's is suing Florence for €18m after it was blocked from opening a restaurant on one of the Italian city's most historic plazas.
The fast-food giant had its plans for an outlet on the Piazza del Duomo rejected by Florence's mayor in June.
The decision was upheld in July by a technical panel in charge of preserving the city's ancient heart.
But McDonald's, which modified its proposals to fit with city guidelines, has now launched a bid for damages.
The chain is claiming it has been discriminated against, and wants to recoup the €17.8m (£15.9m; $19.7m) it estimates it will lose over the next 18 years, according to Italian newspaper Firenze Today. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37910431
How would you feel without NATO facing the Russians?
How would you feel about re-arming the Germans to deal with it?
I'm also pleasantly surprised, having done the full sums. Subject to final confirmation on a couple of small bets, I think I'm £419 in profit overall, despite making a serious contribution to the Sporting Index Xmas Party. I'm still kicking myself for screwing up last night when I could have closed off on the spreads and saved myself a tidy sum if I'd been quicker, but a profit is a profit!
Look at this map of dwindling Palestinian land.
http://tinyurl.com/o9ptv4y
NH has less than a million votes to count FFS!
Do you have a rank order of states by turnout? One thing that puzzles me is that in safe states (or safe seats here) the turnout is much the same as in marginals, despite all the focus on leaflets and GOTV. The ground game is pretty marginal at best.
Unpaid twitter rampers like Plato are the new canvassing, and no need to stick to accuracy.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/qsahmed/the-10-most-gerrymandered-districts-in-america-dh45?utm_term=.as5Dn8q3N#.xevZ5Axa3
"Can we trust the people? After Trump, I’m no longer sure
Matthew Parris"
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/can-trust-people-trump-im-no-longer-sure/
(((Harry Enten))) @ForecasterEnten
In Pennsylvania's Cambria County (home to John Murtha), Hillary Clinton lost by 38 points. Bill Clinton won it by 17 in 1996.
' Irish bookmakers Paddy Power are paying out to customers who backed Hillary Clinton to win the US election, three weeks before Americans go to the polls.
The bookmakers are paying out over £800,000, gambling on Donald Trump’s election campaign being all but finished. '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/18/bookmakers-pay-out-over-800000-on-hillary-clinton-winning-us-ele/
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Protests-Erupt-in-Bay-Area-After-Trumps-Presidential-Victory-400509211.html
Worth bearing in mind that the rEU has a GDP of about 7 times Russia in PPP terms. 1% of EU spending is 7% of Russia's, and with only one border to defend. Russia could invade the Baltics or Poland, but would leave with its tail between its legs quickly enough.
Russia struggles to mount more than an exeditionary force in Syria without scaling back efforts elsewhere. If Trumpistan pulls out of NATO, an rEU defence arrangement with China may well work very well at holding the bear at bay.
https://twitter.com/chris_creegan/status/796450955579588608
General Motors Co plans to lay off 2,000 employees at two U.S. auto plants in early 2017, the automaker said on Wednesday.
GM said it will furlough the employees when it cuts the third shift at its Lordstown, Ohio and Lansing, Michigan plants in mid-January.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN13431E
Trump better get cracking.
Even back in the 1970s he would refer to Thatcher as 'Hilda' as he thought it was a more plebian name than Margaret.