politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Former White House Coms Director predicts Trump will quit WH20

SystemSystem Posts: 12,171
edited August 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Former White House Coms Director predicts Trump will quit WH2020 race by March

Over the weekend I’ve placed of bets at effectively about 10/1 that Trump will not be the Republican nominee at WH2020. I’ve done this by laying Trump on the Betfair 2020 nominee market. This has been prompted by two developments.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    Scaramouche!
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    Anthony Who?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Anyhoo, while I'm here let me park this here, as I will need it in future

    https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cs1c0f/logical_fallacies_yourlogicalfallacyiscom/
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, while I'm here let me park this here, as I will need it in future

    https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cs1c0f/logical_fallacies_yourlogicalfallacyiscom/

    I'm worried it is too powerful, PB could be reduced to cricket chat and Morris dancers dodgy/exceptional F1 tips.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    TheJezziah said:

    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, while I'm here let me park this here, as I will need it in future

    https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cs1c0f/logical_fallacies_yourlogicalfallacyiscom/

    I'm worried it is too powerful, PB could be reduced to cricket chat and Morris dancers dodgy/exceptional F1 tips.
    I wouldn't worry about it. I can always make Star Trek references and swear a lot. That always seem to cheer people up. Well, I think it's cheer... :)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1163271778225020928
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Much as I'd like to believe Trump will not stand again - and "The Mooch" (sic) has reasonable logic I suspect its got more to do with keeping the Mooch on TV than what will actually happen with Trump. We all know that if Trump loses it will be somebody - everybody - else's fault, not his - and I doubt he has remotely enough self-awareness to see the polls for what they are - it will be fake news and America is doing great!!!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Now 18 months old, but an interesting pan-European analysis of how the left has lost its traditional base - and how its new base puts it in direct conflict with its old:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/what-happened-to-europes-left-from-proletariat-to-precariat/
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    'Ruthless and organised' Labour and Tory MPs opposed to No Deal Brexit plan 'radical' new law to block it

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7369057/Labour-Tory-MPs-opposed-No-Deal-Brexit-plan-radical-new-law-block-it.html

    Eh?

    "Indecisive and Disorganised" would be nearer the mark.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Ouch! To put it in terms a former casino operator should understand: “There comes a time when you need to lay your cards on the table or fold.”

    https://twitter.com/EllenLWeintraub/status/1162474973115666434?s=20
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    CarlottaVance said:

    Ouch! To put it in terms a former casino operator should understand: “There comes a time when you need to lay your cards on the table or fold.”

    https://twitter.com/EllenLWeintraub/status/1162474973115666434?s=20

    It's worrying/interesting how much the American and British right playbooks overlap.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese manufacturers turned pessimistic about business prospects for the first time in more than six years in August as the specter of a global downturn looms large amid the escalating Sino-U.S. trade war, the monthly Reuters Tankan survey showed on Monday.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-economy-tankan-idUSKCN1V80PT
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    I think that's a very astute observation.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    rcs1000 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    I think that's a very astute observation.
    Last time around, the scuttle buck was that he didn't believe he could win but saw the whole political campaign more in terms of a massive, free marketing campaign for his brand which he could capitalize on once he lost. But he didn't lose.

    So I don't think comparisons with last time are that valid. However, I do believe he is quite capable of simply not believing the polls, and I don't believe that Scarramouch is much of an expert on character.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Interesting article because I was thinking a few months ago that Trump will only stand again if he thinks he's got a pretty good chance of winning. Otherwise he won't.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited August 2019
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    The ending of Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes" goes like this:


    "But he hasn't got anything on!" the whole town cried out at last.

    The Emperor shivered, for he suspected they were right. But he thought, "This procession has got to go on." So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn't there at all."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    WASHINGTON (AP) - A number of U.S. business economists appear sufficiently concerned about the risks of some of President Donald Trump's economic policies that they expect a recession in the U.S. by the end of 2021.

    Thirty-four percent of economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics, in a report being released Monday, said they believe a slowing economy will tip into recession in 2021. That's up from 25% in a survey taken in February. Only 2% of those polled expect a recession to begin this year, while 38% predict that it will occur in 2020.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-7370479/Economists-survey-34-expect-US-recession-2021.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    https://twitter.com/anyabike/status/1163191773214191617?s=20
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Jezziah, that's the most wonderful post you've ever made.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Are we actually going to have an August day without rain? Here, anyway, in the driest part of the UK.

    On topic, I suspect Trump will stand, lose, cry foul and we'll have have a lot of tension about whether he'll accept the result.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,733
    Good tip, also covers health, sanity and indictment reasons not to be the Republican nominee.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    Chris said:

    Scaramouche!

    Do you by any chance do the fandango?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    What question will be put to voters has been contentious since the Referendums (Scotland) Bill was published in May. The bill said that, if the proposed question had already been assessed by the commission, it should not have to be assessed again.

    This would exclude the commission’s involvement in the same question as 2014 – “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?”

    The commission has since ruled out a Yes/No question in the Brexit referendum, instead recommending a Remain/Leave question. This was found to be more balanced after fresh evidence was taken.

    A change from Yes/No to a Leave/Remain question could damage the pro-independence movement, with the Yes campaign widely seen as having been successful in conveying a positive message in 2014.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/electoral-watchdog-insists-on-assessing-any-indyref2-question-before-it-is-put-to-voters-1-4986373
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    OldKingCole said:

    Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Are we actually going to have an August day without rain? Here, anyway, in the driest part of the UK.

    On topic, I suspect Trump will stand, lose, cry foul and we'll have have a lot of tension about whether he'll accept the result.

    Of more concern is the things he’ll actually get up to between his defeat and his opponent’s inauguration.
    The most benign of which would be a slew of Presidential pardons.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    TheJezziah said:

    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, while I'm here let me park this here, as I will need it in future

    https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cs1c0f/logical_fallacies_yourlogicalfallacyiscom/

    I'm worried it is too powerful, PB could be reduced to cricket chat and Morris dancers dodgy/exceptional F1 tips.
    On the bright side, there’d be more room for the exceptional pun skills of @ydoethur

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    While we’re discussing implausible names, an appreciation of the young Marcus Labuschange:
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/aug/18/marnus-labuschagne-great-for-a-day-concussion-substitute-steve-smith
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.


    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    Nigelb said:

    OldKingCole said:

    Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Are we actually going to have an August day without rain? Here, anyway, in the driest part of the UK.

    On topic, I suspect Trump will stand, lose, cry foul and we'll have have a lot of tension about whether he'll accept the result.

    Of more concern is the things he’ll actually get up to between his defeat and his opponent’s inauguration.
    The most benign of which would be a slew of Presidential pardons.
    Yes; all part of accepting (or otherwise) the result.

    I can just imagine one of his rallies! "Fix" would be the least of the cries, and one way and another that could end up with inciting one of his madder supporters to pick up his AK47 and head for somewhere where he thought there might a lot of Democrats.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    Worth noting that this market is settled on who is elected nominee at the convention, which isn’t necessarily the same as who stands as republican candidate in the election, because of the few months in between.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    rcs1000 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    I think that's a very astute observation.
    Difference being that this time he does actually want to win.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    OldKingCole said:

    Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Are we actually going to have an August day without rain? Here, anyway, in the driest part of the UK.

    On topic, I suspect Trump will stand, lose, cry foul and we'll have have a lot of tension about whether he'll accept the result.


    No, and hopefully.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    Nigelb said:

    TheJezziah said:

    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, while I'm here let me park this here, as I will need it in future

    https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cs1c0f/logical_fallacies_yourlogicalfallacyiscom/

    I'm worried it is too powerful, PB could be reduced to cricket chat and Morris dancers dodgy/exceptional F1 tips.
    On the bright side, there’d be more room for the dodgy/exceptional pun skills of @ydoethur

    You missed the key bit from @Jezziah’s OP
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    Scaramuccu now seems to have turned against Trump so I would not read too much into this.

    The interesting thing about that Fox News poll is only Biden on 50% exceeds the 48% Hillary got against Trump, Sanders matches Hillary's total and Warren and Harris both get lower voteshare thsn Hillary got.

    So do not count Trump out yet, if he gets the 46% he got in 2016 out again in 2020 he can certainly win the Electoral College against Sanders, Harris and Warren and maybe even the popular vote too against the latter two.

    Against Biden though Trump would have to get more than the 46% he got in 2016 as a 4% popular vote gap rather than the 2% gap he got against Hillary would likely see Biden home, especially as Biden is likely to play better in the rustbelt than Hillary did.

    So Scaramucci's comments only really apply in relation to Biden I think
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,865
    I don't think that there is a 10% chance that Trump will not be the Republican nominee. Health is always a potential issue for someone of his age and weight but that apart he looks nailed on.

    I don't believe for a moment that he will believe he can be humiliated. He knows his base is still solid for him and his rallies continue to be high energy events. Of course he won by fine margins the last time against a poor opponent and he could easily lose but he won't be humiliated.

    On the economy a slow down or recession at some point is inevitable. His policies of running a large deficit combined with bullying of the Fed to reduce interest rates have deferred that day, probably at long term cost to the economy. Whether they can continue to defer it to election day is moot but until the nomination process is completed seems pretty safe. At the moment employment is high and growth good, if slowing against international headwinds.

    I am struggling to see any arguments in favour of this bet.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1163328767240081408
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    CarlottaVance said:

    'Ruthless and organised' Labour and Tory MPs opposed to No Deal Brexit plan 'radical' new law to block it

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7369057/Labour-Tory-MPs-opposed-No-Deal-Brexit-plan-radical-new-law-block-it.html

    Eh?

    "Indecisive and Disorganised" would be nearer the mark.

    Typical CRAP journalism from the Mail, with a headline proclaiming a "radical new law" from "ruthless and organised MPs" over a story where the key line is: "But what is less clear is what parliamentary device they plan to use so they can do this."
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    Can't see it as a 10% chance. This is a man who seems to believe that whatever crap comes out of his mouth becomes true just by him saying it. Is he going to give up because of opinion polls in March? He might not even give up after losing the actual election in November.

    If he really does want to pack it in, he'll need a good excuse, one that feeds grievance, blames other people, and gets a lot of attention. Something like:

    "I'm being forced to withdraw from seeking reelection because the Deep State are threatening to kill Ivanka"
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,216
    I think 90% is about right actually and greened up here a few weeks back - the 1-2+ on Trump being the nominee was massive.

    Back Donald Trump
    for £273.58 @ 1.66 to win £180.05
    Lay Donald Trump
    for £405.00 @ 1.12 liability £48.60

    He's extremely obese (More like 300 lbs and 6 foot) whatever his doctor says and is in his 70s . All those concerns over Sanders and Biden are not so acute, they're around 2-1 collectively not 1-10.
    So, de Novo 10-1 represents slight value - having Pence green in the presidential market is also correct.
    Over time though the odds will of course shorten to 1.01 if nothing happens though.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    edited August 2019
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    Trump "lost" last time as well - by a big margin, 3m+ votes. But by accident or design [ a bit of both as the Rust Belt was his only path ] he won the EC. This time to replicate the same trick might be more difficult. Blacks will turn out this time and those small margins in the Midwest will be made up. The Hispanic vote does not have much of an impact in these states but will make sure that New Mexico, Nevada definitely stays Blue. I would put Arizona in the mix.
    I'd look at the Iowa caucuses as well. Normally Iowa is reasonably safe Republican, but the China policy have affected the farmers badly regardless of how much subsidy he puts in.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865

    Wow the government have sorted all those issues out in 18 days and during the holiday season, those new ministers must be hot shit!
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    HYUFD said:

    Scaramuccu now seems to have turned against Trump so I would not read too much into this.

    The interesting thing about that Fox News poll is only Biden on 50% exceeds the 48% Hillary got against Trump, Sanders matches Hillary's total and Warren and Harris both get lower voteshare thsn Hillary got.

    So do not count Trump out yet, if he gets the 46% he got in 2016 out again in 2020 he can certainly win the Electoral College against Sanders, Harris and Warren and maybe even the popular vote too against the latter two.

    Against Biden though Trump would have to get more than the 46% he got in 2016 as a 4% popular vote gap rather than the 2% gap he got against Hillary would likely see Biden home, especially as Biden is likely to play better in the rustbelt than Hillary did.

    So Scaramucci's comments only really apply in relation to Biden I think

    For someone who seems treats current opinion polls as gospel, you consistently ignore all the opinion polls that don't fit your dogma. For example, all the opinion polls that show Trump losing Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (and sometimes others) against most Dem candidates.

    Of course, polls this far out aren't very predictive, but you treat them as if they are just in a very partial way. Now don't take this personally, but I find it fairly tedious.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    CarlottaVance said:

    Now 18 months old, but an interesting pan-European analysis of how the left has lost its traditional base - and how its new base puts it in direct conflict with its old:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/what-happened-to-europes-left-from-proletariat-to-precariat/

    Yes, I remember this being posted and discussed here at the time. Well worth a recap.

    He summarises the electoral challenge faced by the left - the gulf in culture between the left-wing middle class and its traditional working class base - being exacerbated by the shrinkage in size and influence of the latter and the impact of globalisation on the former. It skips over the additional factor of the growing ethnic mix of the 'disadvantaged' (WWC->WC) on cultural attitude.

    He also sets out the intellectual problem that the demise of both communism and the credibility of capitalism has left both socialists and social democrats without a holistic 'world view' upon which to build their platforms.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    Pulpstar said:

    I think 90% is about right actually and greened up here a few weeks back - the 1-2+ on Trump being the nominee was massive.

    Back Donald Trump
    for £273.58 @ 1.66 to win £180.05
    Lay Donald Trump
    for £405.00 @ 1.12 liability £48.60

    He's extremely obese (More like 300 lbs and 6 foot) whatever his doctor says and is in his 70s . All those concerns over Sanders and Biden are not so acute, they're around 2-1 collectively not 1-10.
    So, de Novo 10-1 represents slight value - having Pence green in the presidential market is also correct.
    Over time though the odds will of course shorten to 1.01 if nothing happens though.

    Is he extremely obese? He doesn’t look it.

    Overweight, definitely, but not a whale.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1163328767240081408

    This can’t be true, because @another_richard keeps telling us it is Project Fear.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    surbiton19 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    Trump "lost" last time as well - by a big margin, 3m+ votes. But by accident or design [ a bit of both as the Rust Belt was his only path ] he won the EC. This time to replicate the same trick might be more difficult. Blacks will turn out this time and those small margins in the Midwest will be made up. The Hispanic vote does not have much of an impact in these states but will make sure that New Mexico, Nevada definitely stays Blue. I would put Arizona in the mix.
    I'd look at the Iowa caucuses as well. Normally Iowa is reasonably safe Republican, but the China policy have affected the farmers badly regardless of how much subsidy he puts in.
    But, will Blacks turn out this time?

    Doesn’t that depend on who the Democrats pick?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    surbiton19 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    Trump "lost" last time as well - by a big margin, 3m+ votes. But by accident or design [ a bit of both as the Rust Belt was his only path ]. This time to replicate the same trick might be more difficult. Blacks will turn out this time and those small margins in the Midwest will be made up. The Hispanic vote does not have much of an impact in these states but will make sure that New Mexico, Nevada definitely stays Blue. I would put Arizona in the mix.
    I'd look at the Iowa caucuses as well. Normally Iowa is reasonably safe Republican, but the China policy have affected the farmers badly regardless of how much subsidy he puts in.
    That is a slightly different question: will Trump win? The bet is whether the president will be so convinced he cannot win that he does not even run.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865

    Wow the government have sorted all those issues out in 18 days and during the holiday season, those new ministers must be hot shit!
    Half right, I'd suggest?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited August 2019
    surbiton19 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    Trump "lost" last time as well - by a big margin, 3m+ votes. But by accident or design [ a bit of both as the Rust Belt was his only path ] he won the EC. This time to replicate the same trick might be more difficult. Blacks will turn out this time and those small margins in the Midwest will be made up. The Hispanic vote does not have much of an impact in these states but will make sure that New Mexico, Nevada definitely stays Blue. I would put Arizona in the mix.
    I'd look at the Iowa caucuses as well. Normally Iowa is reasonably safe Republican, but the China policy have affected the farmers badly regardless of how much subsidy he puts in.
    I don't think the black vote will necessarily turn out in higher numbers than 2016, especially if Biden is not the nominee, or at a push Harris
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    nichomar said:

    Wow the government have sorted all those issues out in 18 days and during the holiday season, those new ministers must be hot shit!

    https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1163068289641308161
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,565
    edited August 2019
    OldKingCole said:

    Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Are we actually going to have an August day without rain? Here, anyway, in the driest part of the UK.

    On topic, I suspect Trump will stand, lose, cry foul and we'll have have a lot of tension about whether he'll accept the result.

    Deleted
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    DavidL said:

    I don't think that there is a 10% chance that Trump will not be the Republican nominee. Health is always a potential issue for someone of his age and weight but that apart he looks nailed on.

    I don't believe for a moment that he will believe he can be humiliated. He knows his base is still solid for him and his rallies continue to be high energy events. Of course he won by fine margins the last time against a poor opponent and he could easily lose but he won't be humiliated.

    On the economy a slow down or recession at some point is inevitable. His policies of running a large deficit combined with bullying of the Fed to reduce interest rates have deferred that day, probably at long term cost to the economy. Whether they can continue to defer it to election day is moot but until the nomination process is completed seems pretty safe. At the moment employment is high and growth good, if slowing against international headwinds.

    I am struggling to see any arguments in favour of this bet.


    I think it’s priced about right.

    He’d take not restanding as an admission of defeat, and will want his policies vindicated, so I expect him to do so.

    If he loses he’ll make Hillary’s post defeat book look like the dictionary definition of humility.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited August 2019
    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scaramuccu now seems to have turned against Trump so I would not read too much into this.

    The interesting thing about that Fox News poll is only Biden on 50% exceeds the 48% Hillary got against Trump, Sanders matches Hillary's total and Warren and Harris both get lower voteshare thsn Hillary got.

    So do not count Trump out yet, if he gets the 46% he got in 2016 out again in 2020 he can certainly win the Electoral College against Sanders, Harris and Warren and maybe even the popular vote too against the latter two.

    Against Biden though Trump would have to get more than the 46% he got in 2016 as a 4% popular vote gap rather than the 2% gap he got against Hillary would likely see Biden home, especially as Biden is likely to play better in the rustbelt than Hillary did.

    So Scaramucci's comments only really apply in relation to Biden I think

    For someone who seems treats current opinion polls as gospel, you consistently ignore all the opinion polls that don't fit your dogma. For example, all the opinion polls that show Trump losing Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (and sometimes others) against most Dem candidates.

    Of course, polls this far out aren't very predictive, but you treat them as if they are just in a very partial way. Now don't take this personally, but I find it fairly tedious.
    Polls like the latest one from Pennsylvania showing only Biden beating Trump in the state, with Trump beating Warren and Sanders and tied with Harris? Or the latest poll from Michigan again showing only Biden beating Trump, with Trump again beating Warren and tied with Sanders in the state.

    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/


    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/

    Apologies if you find facts tedious but tough
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865

    If Number 10 is not careful, it will find itself at war with the Murdoch empire going into an election. This is the second Times/ST story in a week that has been leaked and then rubbished. First was the stamp duty change. Ministers should not use the press as a focus group for manifesto ideas.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.


    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    I think the only post-war President not to stand for re-election was Lyndon Johnson. I would have thought that not standing would be more humiliating than standing and losing.

    The polarisation of US politics means that, at worst, the margin of defeat is unlikely to be that large compared to the historical record, and, who knows, maybe he will be anticipating some unconventional assistance during the campaign to sneak home.

    The Democrats are really not that far ahead.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865

    If Number 10 is not careful, it will find itself at war with the Murdoch empire going into an election. This is the second Times/ST story in a week that has been leaked and then rubbished. First was the stamp duty change. Ministers should not use the press as a focus group for manifesto ideas.
    Maybe leakers should stop leaking but I don't think this was deliberately leaked by Number 10.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think 90% is about right actually and greened up here a few weeks back - the 1-2+ on Trump being the nominee was massive.

    Back Donald Trump
    for £273.58 @ 1.66 to win £180.05
    Lay Donald Trump
    for £405.00 @ 1.12 liability £48.60

    He's extremely obese (More like 300 lbs and 6 foot) whatever his doctor says and is in his 70s . All those concerns over Sanders and Biden are not so acute, they're around 2-1 collectively not 1-10.
    So, de Novo 10-1 represents slight value - having Pence green in the presidential market is also correct.
    Over time though the odds will of course shorten to 1.01 if nothing happens though.

    Is he extremely obese? He doesn’t look it.

    Overweight, definitely, but not a whale.
    He’s not “extremely obese”, just “obese”.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/14/trump-technically-obese-doctors-health-1170438
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1163329615127076865

    Wow the government have sorted all those issues out in 18 days and during the holiday season, those new ministers must be hot shit!
    Half right, I'd suggest?
    Liz Truss and Boris Johnson will both be offended at not being considered hot.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. JohnL, the stamp duty kite-flying may have the scent of ministerial leaking. The medicines shortage stuff looks more like a backbencher or non-MP, to me, anyway.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    Philip_Thompson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.

    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
    The problem is that your personal preferences run counter to the geopolitical logic of Brexit and the domestic political imperatives that sustain it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    Greta has done about a third of her crossing:

    https://www.borisherrmannracing.com/
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843
    Trump will run, he's not going to be scared off by bad polling, it's all fake news for him. He's already been slagging off fox news now because their polling numbers are less favourable. The guy is President, people don't just give that job up without a fight. In fact if he does lose (I think he will beat any of the dem candidates unfortunately), he will almost certainly claim some sort of electoral fraud being responsible. He will never just concede in good faith.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1163345334044700674
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1163345334044700674

    Was Iain Duncan Smith not alive in 1974 or is he just pig ignorant?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,216
    CarlottaVance said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think 90% is about right actually and greened up here a few weeks back - the 1-2+ on Trump being the nominee was massive.

    Back Donald Trump
    for £273.58 @ 1.66 to win £180.05
    Lay Donald Trump
    for £405.00 @ 1.12 liability £48.60

    He's extremely obese (More like 300 lbs and 6 foot) whatever his doctor says and is in his 70s . All those concerns over Sanders and Biden are not so acute, they're around 2-1 collectively not 1-10.
    So, de Novo 10-1 represents slight value - having Pence green in the presidential market is also correct.
    Over time though the odds will of course shorten to 1.01 if nothing happens though.

    Is he extremely obese? He doesn’t look it.

    Overweight, definitely, but not a whale.
    He’s not “extremely obese”, just “obese”.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/14/trump-technically-obese-doctors-health-1170438
    He's going to live to 200 years old too
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    williamglenn said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.

    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
    The problem is that your personal preferences run counter to the geopolitical logic of Brexit and the domestic political imperatives that sustain it.
    No, it doesn't.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    OblitusSumMe said:

    I think the only post-war President not to stand for re-election was Lyndon Johnson. I would have thought that not standing would be more humiliating than standing and losing.

    The polarisation of US politics means that, at worst, the margin of defeat is unlikely to be that large compared to the historical record, and, who knows, maybe he will be anticipating some unconventional assistance during the campaign to sneak home.

    The Democrats are really not that far ahead.

    Plus Truman in 1952, though he had already served 7 years by then
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    williamglenn said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.

    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
    The problem is that your personal preferences run counter to the geopolitical logic of Brexit and the domestic political imperatives that sustain it.
    And the science
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    OblitusSumMe said:

    I think the only post-war President not to stand for re-election was Lyndon Johnson. I would have thought that not standing would be more humiliating than standing and losing.

    Not exactly correct. Harry Truman took over the presidency Mid-Term in the 45-49 presidency, although it was very early on. He stood in the 48 election and won, but did not stand in the 52 election in which he was eligible to stand.

    There was one other president who did not stand for re-election, but there was a rather obvious biological reason for it.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1163345334044700674

    Was Iain Duncan Smith not alive in 1974 or is he just pig ignorant?
    I’ve got a slogan they can use.....one careless owner.....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,216
    He is ahead 95-2 of Sanford in a new South Carolina primary poll of the GOP btw
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    HYUFD said:

    surbiton19 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Trump might not be able to cope with the prospect of defeat but he might not believe it either. He was behind in the polls last time, for the nomination and in the election itself. Is the Donald a Corbynista, confident he can make up 20 points in the campaign?

    Trump "lost" last time as well - by a big margin, 3m+ votes. But by accident or design [ a bit of both as the Rust Belt was his only path ] he won the EC. This time to replicate the same trick might be more difficult. Blacks will turn out this time and those small margins in the Midwest will be made up. The Hispanic vote does not have much of an impact in these states but will make sure that New Mexico, Nevada definitely stays Blue. I would put Arizona in the mix.
    I'd look at the Iowa caucuses as well. Normally Iowa is reasonably safe Republican, but the China policy have affected the farmers badly regardless of how much subsidy he puts in.
    I don't think the black vote will necessarily turn out in higher numbers than 2016, especially if Biden is not the nominee, or at a push Harris
    I think otherwise.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,406
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1163345334044700674

    Was Iain Duncan Smith not alive in 1974 or is he just pig ignorant?
    Happy to vote for an election if you extend until 31st December..
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,464
    williamglenn said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.

    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
    The problem is that your personal preferences run counter to the geopolitical logic of Brexit and the domestic political imperatives that sustain it.
    there is no way you can ban palm oil......it is in everything bio-diesel, toothpaste, nutella, soap etc etc etc.....the best thing you can do is support sustainable (slightly pricier) production methods....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,388
    Casino_Royale said:

    DavidL said:

    I don't think that there is a 10% chance that Trump will not be the Republican nominee. Health is always a potential issue for someone of his age and weight but that apart he looks nailed on.

    I don't believe for a moment that he will believe he can be humiliated. He knows his base is still solid for him and his rallies continue to be high energy events. Of course he won by fine margins the last time against a poor opponent and he could easily lose but he won't be humiliated.

    On the economy a slow down or recession at some point is inevitable. His policies of running a large deficit combined with bullying of the Fed to reduce interest rates have deferred that day, probably at long term cost to the economy. Whether they can continue to defer it to election day is moot but until the nomination process is completed seems pretty safe. At the moment employment is high and growth good, if slowing against international headwinds.

    I am struggling to see any arguments in favour of this bet.


    I think it’s priced about right.

    He’d take not restanding as an admission of defeat, and will want his policies vindicated, so I expect him to do so.

    If he loses he’ll make Hillary’s post defeat book look like the dictionary definition of humility.
    Defeat? Why would he accept defeat with all that voter fraud going on in his mind?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Labour is really clarifying their Brexit position this morning.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720
    Philip_Thompson said:

    williamglenn said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    The PM of Malaysia writes:

    Post-Brexit, the U.K. will have a historic opportunity to strike a trade deal with one of the world’s fastest-growing regions and prove that it can shed European red tape and protectionism. The key is to rethink the European Union’s misguided policy on palm oil.

    In 2017, the European Parliament approved a resolution to phase out and eventually ban biofuels made from palm oil, a major export for Malaysia and Indonesia. Earlier this year, the European Commission limited the types of biofuels from palm oil that can be counted toward Europe’s renewable-energy goals. The restrictions could, despite our best efforts, trigger a trade war with producer nations.

    European Union officials justify the ban on environmental grounds. In fact, it’s designed to protect the agricultural industries of a few EU states.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-19/malaysia-s-mahathir-post-brexit-u-k-should-drop-eu-palm-oil-ban

    I'd agree with a post-Brexit Britain banning palm oil, going further even than the Europeans have gone. I don't think this is a Brexit issue realistically.
    The problem is that your personal preferences run counter to the geopolitical logic of Brexit and the domestic political imperatives that sustain it.
    No, it doesn't.
    Have you not noticed how keen the people driving the bus are on signing trade deals?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scaramuccu now seems to have turned against Trump so I would not read too much into this.

    The interesting thing about that Fox News poll is only Biden on 50% exceeds the 48% Hillary got against Trump, Sanders matches Hillary's total and Warren and Harris both get lower voteshare thsn Hillary got.

    So do not count Trump out yet, if he gets the 46% he got in 2016 out again in 2020 he can certainly win the Electoral College against Sanders, Harris and Warren and maybe even the popular vote too against the latter two.

    Against Biden though Trump would have to get more than the 46% he got in 2016 as a 4% popular vote gap rather than the 2% gap he got against Hillary would likely see Biden home, especially as Biden is likely to play better in the rustbelt than Hillary did.

    So Scaramucci's comments only really apply in relation to Biden I think

    For someone who seems treats current opinion polls as gospel, you consistently ignore all the opinion polls that don't fit your dogma. For example, all the opinion polls that show Trump losing Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (and sometimes others) against most Dem candidates.

    Of course, polls this far out aren't very predictive, but you treat them as if they are just in a very partial way. Now don't take this personally, but I find it fairly tedious.
    Polls like the latest one from Pennsylvania showing only Biden beating Trump in the state, with Trump beating Warren and Sanders and tied with Harris? Or the latest poll from Michigan again showing only Biden beating Trump, with Trump again beating Warren and tied with Sanders in the state.

    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/


    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/

    Apologies if you find facts tedious but tough
    This is exactly what I am talking about: 2 polls from one pollster (Optimus - graded as C- by 538 fwiw) are "facts". All the other polls are ignored. Every post of yours is the same, kinda tedious.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/michigan/
    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/pennsylvania/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    CarlottaVance said:

    What question will be put to voters has been contentious since the Referendums (Scotland) Bill was published in May. The bill said that, if the proposed question had already been assessed by the commission, it should not have to be assessed again.

    This would exclude the commission’s involvement in the same question as 2014 – “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?”

    The commission has since ruled out a Yes/No question in the Brexit referendum, instead recommending a Remain/Leave question. This was found to be more balanced after fresh evidence was taken.

    A change from Yes/No to a Leave/Remain question could damage the pro-independence movement, with the Yes campaign widely seen as having been successful in conveying a positive message in 2014.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/electoral-watchdog-insists-on-assessing-any-indyref2-question-before-it-is-put-to-voters-1-4986373

    Unionists bricking it and will go to any lengths to stop democracy.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Gallowgate said:

    Labour is really clarifying their Brexit position this morning.

    Oh goody! What is it?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,806
    Mr. G, unlike the SNP, which opposes the results of both the 2014 and 2016 referendum votes...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    CarlottaVance said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1163345334044700674

    Was Iain Duncan Smith not alive in 1974 or is he just pig ignorant?
    I’ve got a slogan they can use.....one careless owner.....
    It could end with even Moor of a shambles than Heath.

    That was for you, @Nigelb
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    What question will be put to voters has been contentious since the Referendums (Scotland) Bill was published in May. The bill said that, if the proposed question had already been assessed by the commission, it should not have to be assessed again.

    This would exclude the commission’s involvement in the same question as 2014 – “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?”

    The commission has since ruled out a Yes/No question in the Brexit referendum, instead recommending a Remain/Leave question. This was found to be more balanced after fresh evidence was taken.

    A change from Yes/No to a Leave/Remain question could damage the pro-independence movement, with the Yes campaign widely seen as having been successful in conveying a positive message in 2014.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/electoral-watchdog-insists-on-assessing-any-indyref2-question-before-it-is-put-to-voters-1-4986373

    Unionists bricking it and will go to any lengths to stop democracy.
    Nats terrified they won’t be able to rig it again.....

    The format of the Brexit question seems perfectly reasonable....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,388
    CarlottaVance said:

    Gallowgate said:

    Labour is really clarifying their Brexit position this morning.

    Oh goody! What is it?
    For our Remain voters we support a second referendum and for our Leave voters we support a deal. Clear now?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20

    Trouble is, McDonnell is right, or nearly right anyway. Corbyn's extension plus election plan looks more plausible than GNU fantasies around Ken Clarke. No-one commands a majority in the House, except perhaps Boris, and on Brexit that seems unlikely. If the Remainers are serious about stopping Brexit, they need to hold their noses and support Corbyn, or at least come up with a viable alternative rather than yet more unicorns.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155
    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/anyabike/status/1163191773214191617?s=20

    Fuck that. Literal nazis are not the same as somewhat obnoxious lefties. Spencer literally calls for the US to become an white ethnostate, his politics is inherently violent. Punching him and his ilk to keep them off the streets is an act of self defence. Beating up a left wing, gay journalist is not that.

    https://twitter.com/existentialcoms/status/922243012058480640
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20

    It's not arrogance it is realism. Parliament has spent the entire year split 3+ ways and refusing to do its job, now even when it comes down to mere weeks before the hardest of No Deal exits they're still refusing to decide.

    Parliament has a choice.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    What question will be put to voters has been contentious since the Referendums (Scotland) Bill was published in May. The bill said that, if the proposed question had already been assessed by the commission, it should not have to be assessed again.

    This would exclude the commission’s involvement in the same question as 2014 – “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?”

    The commission has since ruled out a Yes/No question in the Brexit referendum, instead recommending a Remain/Leave question. This was found to be more balanced after fresh evidence was taken.

    A change from Yes/No to a Leave/Remain question could damage the pro-independence movement, with the Yes campaign widely seen as having been successful in conveying a positive message in 2014.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/electoral-watchdog-insists-on-assessing-any-indyref2-question-before-it-is-put-to-voters-1-4986373

    Unionists bricking it and will go to any lengths to stop democracy.
    Nats terrified they won’t be able to rig it again.....

    The format of the Brexit question seems perfectly reasonable....
    Not really. The opposite of "Leave" is "Stay". So it should have been "Leave/Stay" or "Depart/Remain" if you want to use remain. "Leave/Remain" is obviously unfair as "Leave" is an emotional word and "remain" isn't. How many pop songs go "Remain with me"?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    CarlottaVance said:

    'Ruthless and organised' Labour and Tory MPs opposed to No Deal Brexit plan 'radical' new law to block it

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7369057/Labour-Tory-MPs-opposed-No-Deal-Brexit-plan-radical-new-law-block-it.html

    Eh?

    "Indecisive and Disorganised" would be nearer the mark.

    TBF with our future PM, Chuka, leading them how could they be anything other than Ruthless and Organised?

    Just look at his track record
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. G, unlike the SNP, which opposes the results of both the 2014 and 2016 referendum votes...

    What are you talking about MD, no-one in the SNP has questioned the 2014 referendum result and as for the 2016 one , it may have escaped your notice but Scotland voted NO by 2 to 1 so it would be odd if the SNP supported such a heavy defeat. Their interest is Scotland in case you had not noticed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,152
    edited August 2019
    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scaramuccu now seems to have turned against Trump so I would not read too much into this.

    The interesting thing about that Fox News poll is only Biden on 50% exceeds the 48% Hillary got against Trump, Sanders matches Hillary's total and Warren and Harris both get lower voteshare thsn Hillary got.

    So do not count Trump out yet, if he gets the 46% he got in 2016 out again in 2020 he can certainly win the Electoral College against Sanders, Harris and Warren and maybe even the popular vote too against the latter two.

    Against Biden though Trump would have to get more than the 46% he got in 2016 as a 4% popular vote gap rather than the 2% gap he got against Hillary would likely see Biden home, especially as Biden is likely to play better in the rustbelt than Hillary did.

    So Scaramucci's comments only really apply in relation to Biden I think

    For someone who seems treats current opinion polls as gospel, you consistently ignore all the opinion polls that don't fit your dogma. For example, all the opinion polls that show Trump losing Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (and sometimes others) against most Dem candidates.

    Of course, polls this far out aren't very predictive, but you treat them as if they are just in a very partial way. Now don't take this personally, but I find it fairly tedious.
    Polls like the latest one from Pennsylvania showing only Biden beating Trump in the state, with Trump beating Warren and Sanders and tied with Harris? Or the latest poll from Michigan again showing only Biden beating Trump, with Trump again beating Warren and tied with Sanders in the state.

    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/


    http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/

    Apologies if you find facts tedious but tough
    This is exactly what I am talking about: 2 polls from one pollster (Optimus - graded as C- by 538 fwiw) are "facts". All the other polls are ignored. Every post of yours is the same, kinda tedious.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/michigan/
    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/pennsylvania/
    All the polling data, even the above you have just posted (giving Biden a lead over Trump in Michigan and Pennsylvania in every recent poll), shows Biden clearly leads Trump, with any other Democratic candidate it is much closer if not a Trump lead.

    If the Democrats want the best chance to beat Trump they need to nominate Biden, otherwise there is a strong chance of a Trump re election
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    148grss said:

    Fuck that. Literal nazis are not the same as somewhat obnoxious lefties. Spencer literally calls for the US to become an white ethnostate, his politics is inherently violent. Punching him and his ilk to keep them off the streets is an act of self defence. Beating up a left wing, gay journalist is not that.

    https://twitter.com/existentialcoms/status/922243012058480640

    Two wrongs don't make a right.

    It seems for our far left there is negligible difference to Nazis based on your chart. Drop the justifications and acknowledge the left's antisemitism it is:

    Willing to use violence: Yes/Yes
    Free Speech: No/No
    Jews: No/No
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited August 2019
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20

    Trouble is, McDonnell is right, or nearly right anyway. Corbyn's extension plus election plan looks more plausible than GNU fantasies around Ken Clarke. No-one commands a majority in the House, except perhaps Boris, and on Brexit that seems unlikely. If the Remainers are serious about stopping Brexit, they need to hold their noses and support Corbyn, or at least come up with a viable alternative rather than yet more unicorns.
    I saw your posts yesterday and they were pretty spot on. However in this instance Corbyn's a special case. He unites like I'm sure no other Labour leader the Tories against him. Starmer? Okay. La Thornberry? Yup if we have to. Corbyn/Macca/Milne clique? No way.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Beibheirli_C said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Beibheirli_C said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Beibheirli_C said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/movement46/status/1163177529479520257

    Remind me. Isn't the EU on holiday or have I missed something
    They are not the ones holding the solution to the crisis (or the cause of it either)

    Revoke A50!
    How can revoke be the answer. I do not say I would object just I cannot see it
    Nobody wants No Deal and (apparently) extentions are out. The only weapen left in the UK arsenal is Revoke and we will throw that one away too.
    I wish your first sentence was true.

    Sadly too many do want no deal and judging by the polls it is winning more support
    Fine. No Deal it is then.

    At least we can test the Leaver's theory that the biggest driver of economic growth is to make it more diffcult to export to your biggest market.

    Then we can apply to rejoin.
    I really hope it is not a no deal. It is upto the HOC to find the compromise
    That time has passed. The extremists have successfully pushed things so far to the cliff edge that only extreme options have the chance of seeing us either pull back or take flight.

    It makes me so annoyed at the smug satisfaction of those extremists as they cry pretend tears that we have this chaos when this is exactly what no dealers and ultra remainers wanted. They wanted and needed utter chaos to get their way and their phoney regret at the crisis is insulting.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    kamski said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    What question will be put to voters has been contentious since the Referendums (Scotland) Bill was published in May. The bill said that, if the proposed question had already been assessed by the commission, it should not have to be assessed again.

    This would exclude the commission’s involvement in the same question as 2014 – “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?”

    The commission has since ruled out a Yes/No question in the Brexit referendum, instead recommending a Remain/Leave question. This was found to be more balanced after fresh evidence was taken.

    A change from Yes/No to a Leave/Remain question could damage the pro-independence movement, with the Yes campaign widely seen as having been successful in conveying a positive message in 2014.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/electoral-watchdog-insists-on-assessing-any-indyref2-question-before-it-is-put-to-voters-1-4986373

    Unionists bricking it and will go to any lengths to stop democracy.
    Nats terrified they won’t be able to rig it again.....

    The format of the Brexit question seems perfectly reasonable....
    Not really. The opposite of "Leave" is "Stay". So it should have been "Leave/Stay" or "Depart/Remain" if you want to use remain. "Leave/Remain" is obviously unfair as "Leave" is an emotional word and "remain" isn't. How many pop songs go "Remain with me"?
    Remain is very much the U word. Which is no doubt why David Cameron didn't notice the implications of using it.

    (Not that I think it would have really affected the result.)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    TOPPING said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20

    Trouble is, McDonnell is right, or nearly right anyway. Corbyn's extension plus election plan looks more plausible than GNU fantasies around Ken Clarke. No-one commands a majority in the House, except perhaps Boris, and on Brexit that seems unlikely. If the Remainers are serious about stopping Brexit, they need to hold their noses and support Corbyn, or at least come up with a viable alternative rather than yet more unicorns.
    I saw your posts yesterday and they were pretty spot on. However in this instance Corbyn's a special case. He unites like I'm sure no other Labour leader the Tories against him. Starmer? Okay. La Thornberry? Yup if we have to. Corbyn/Macca/Milne clique? No way.
    I cannot see anymore how he could do any worse for the country. No doubt he will surprise me somehow.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    https://twitter.com/Tony_McNulty/status/1163350014594289666?s=20

    Trouble is, McDonnell is right, or nearly right anyway. Corbyn's extension plus election plan looks more plausible than GNU fantasies around Ken Clarke. No-one commands a majority in the House, except perhaps Boris, and on Brexit that seems unlikely. If the Remainers are serious about stopping Brexit, they need to hold their noses and support Corbyn, or at least come up with a viable alternative rather than yet more unicorns.
    It's a shame they're so pathetic, because the one good thing about a No Deal Brexit would have been that it was wholly owned by the Tory party. If the opposition parties carry on playing politics like this, the Tories really will be able to share the blame.
This discussion has been closed.