Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As Trump’s troubles mount punters now give him just a 30% chan
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As Trump’s troubles mount punters now give him just a 30% chance of being re-elected
Although it is not two years since Trump was inaugurated as President the focus is starting to be placed on WH2020. The next six months should see contenders starting to their hats into the ring all building up to the first primaries in little more than a year.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/422735-trump-beats-beto-nearly-ties-bernie-but-loses-to-biden-in
But I do think it'll be a Democrat victory next time around.
FWIW, I’ve been laying him. I think fair value could be anything up to 10/1 at this point (though I accept my views of Trump might somewhat skew that estimate).
But I'm not sure Trump's trroubles are any worse than they've been and he seems to weather most of them and take apart any specific opponent. I'd rather be backing than laying at current odds.
Chaim Soutine’s consoling portraiture
Theodore Dalrymple"
https://www.city-journal.org/chaim-soutine
That isn't to say that he can't win, and I think Betfair is close to right and possibly a tad bearish, but I worry for his chances the more he keeps a hyper-partisan approach. As a Presidential Election approaches I have no doubt more voters than at the midterms will revert to their usual party, but focusing so heavily on his base makes it even harder to win any defectors and can put off independents; depending on who and how the Democrats run.
More than ever the Republicans dominate rural america and Democrats urban america. Rural america is heavily (and intentionally) over-represented in the Senate, but it's only slightly over-represented in the Electoral College. IMHO the suburbs are still crucial, and this year the Democrats have been taking control of those too.
Firing up his base is all well and good, but Trump does need some non-heartland support to win. He is tough to campaign against, but he isn't really reaching out to independents. Betting his presidency on the Democrats not learning how to balance their base and suburban swing voters (when Trump isn't even trying to) is risky.
One thing that the mid-terms should have taught Trump is that is base is not enough for the GOP to hold the House, or the States Trump relied upon to win his own victory.
1. Women have turned vehemently against Trump's government, and hence against the GOP while Trump is dominating it.
2. Trump may fire up his base, but he is also firing up minorities and the young to vote in unprecedented numbers. The math of Trump, given the narrowness of his 2016 victory, is not favoured by this dynamic.
3. I am not convinced that Trump's based is holding quite so firm - at least at the edges - as the polling is capturing. Anecdotally, I am hearing more people who voted for him being turned off and now there is also clear talk, even amongst this group, about whether Trump is fit to be President.
I now expect either a serious candidate to run against Trump in the primaries or a spoiler candidate to run as an independent in the GE to prevent any possibility of his re-election.
That has inverted in the mid terms.
He won with incredible vote efficiency, losing only fractions of a percent kills his chances.
Labour and someone like Rowling are nowhere near one another. It's only the (dubious) glue that the likes of the Guardian oozes that has them akin.
These are natural Clegg voters - liberal but sensible-ish economically. And thus distant from the LDs who are not very liberal and are socialist economically. (A combination that has never been tried... I wonder why)
Hope you all get many nice presents for Christmas.
But I just can't stand the pathetic whining of people like Rowling, or other centrists that Labour has left them politically "homeless"?
Grow up.
Plenty of other parties are available. I'm sure the Greens would be be more than happy to bring Rowling into their fold.
Iowa and New Hampshire still vote before California in the nomination battle so are still important for building momentum
The choice for the US is rather broader.
CON: 39% (+1) LAB: 39% (-) LDEM: 6% (-2) UKIP: 6% (-) GRN: 4% (-) via @OpiniumResearch, 18 - 20 Dec Chgs. w/ 14 Dec
Clearly a quiet period in British politics!
Stalemate and Trench warfare.
Oh never mind
I’d say that’s power, myself.
Merry Christmas........
What does puzzle me is the continuing LibDem weakness. I'd have thought centrist pro-EU Labour supporters would be jolly tempted, but there's not much sign of it. Possibly politics is now simply too polarised to enable life in the interevening territory to flourish.
After similar periods in office (it's actually 8 years 7 months) the government (Tories) were by 6% ahead in Dec 1987...
And the Labour government were ahead by 8%, also after 8y 7m in power, in Dec 2006 .
(Source the Guardian/ICM poll series)
What is notable is that 42% of voters are sticking with Trump no matter what. That should give him *some* comfort.
(a) don't know who the Democratic nominee will be
(b) don't know if the US economy will be humming or in recession
(c) don't know how the various investigations into Trump will turn out
(d) don't know if his health will hold out
Given those uncertainties, anyone reckoning him winning is either a 10% or a 90% shot is massively overconfident.
I had thought him more likely than not to be re-elected a year ago. I now would reckon he is slightly less than a 50% shot, but no worse than 40%.
But the regional GDP data for Q2 showed that the slowest growing states in the US were... in the rust belt again. Idaho and New Mexico were the slowest growers, but after that it was Wisconsin, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Only Michigan bucked the trend in the rust belt.
President Trump needs these states to - if not be leading the pack - then at least not be falling further behind.
If anything this government is struggling, only being roughly neck and neck.
Others who voted No in the 1st EU referendum have since grown up and become more pro-EU, e.g. Ken Livingstone.
It appears that Caroline Lucas wasn't old enough to vote in 1975. Jenny Jones in the HoL who probably was, is still anti-EU. So neither party is 100% pro-EU and not everyone who voted No in their youth has changed their mind.
Who'd have thought it though? Jeremy Corbyn and Bill Cash potentially to go through the same voting lobby.
Michael Foot and Enoch Powell also agreed in 1975, from opposite ends of the political spectrum, that we should leave the EU. Powell sacrificed his career for it.
That might not be 10%, but it's probably more than 5%.
(And for the record, I reckon the 50% on Pence, as then sitting President, winning the nomination is way low.)
The Democrats haven't shown any signs of wanting to elect someone terrible. They managed to pick reasonably centrist candidates where they needed to (except Florida), the candidates who look like turn-offs by being too far left (Sanders, Warren) are getting very little traction and there's no Hillaryesque weak candidate with a grip on the machine. So it's likely they'll have a generally competent candidate.
The economy is a bit hard to read but it's not looking great, and like you say, it's particularly not looking great in the rust belt.
If you just take those two, I think he'd be well below a 40% chance. Then you have the investigations and health, neither if which I'd expect to be important, but they can only surprise on the down side.
Scenario 1, autumn 2020 - the USA is in recession, big companies have left, Trump is dogged by impeachment proceedings as a result of previous corrupt behaviour, ISIS is on the rise and North Korea has shown that they have gamed Trump.
Scenario 2 - the US economy has continued to grow at a rapid rate, wages have risen, companies have returned to the rust belt, Trump has been subject to impeachment proceedings but the case against him has been shown to be vanishingly weak and politically motivated, more troops have come home without significant kickback, and the Korean peninsula has taken more steps towards reunification.
I think both of these scenarios are entirely possible, one of which would give a clear Dem victory and the other a Trump landslide. So basically, we do not know, and for that reason I find 30 per cent too low.