Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bloomberg’s WH2020 bid looks serious and credible and it helps
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bloomberg’s WH2020 bid looks serious and credible and it helps that he’s worth $50bn
Above is one of the first WH2020 campaign ads for 77 year old Michael Bloomberg who announced at the weekend that we was running for the White House. His approach to the campaign for the Democratic is very different from his rivals.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
ETA: of course, the same was said about Trump being a Democrat.
This time, he's going to run, and he will lose badly.
Iowa and New Hampshire will be won by Pete Buttigieg (who is now second in the national polling, behind only Biden). He may stumble a little in South Carolina, but there are a lot of moderates in the Democratic party looking for a young articulate candidate.
Step forward Mayor Pete.
I mean who on earth is going to donate to someone who has 50 billion dollars, where will he find 200,000 unique donors from.
The reality is, however, that Iowa is likely to be Buttigieg win. This means he'll get a national polling bump, and a New Hampshire polling bump. Assuming he wins Iowa, he will be clear odds on favourite for NH. So, assume 60% chance of an Iowa win, and then 60% chance of him winning NH if he wins Iowa.
Next up comes Nevada. That's another caucus, and a more left wing, more Hispanic one than Iowa. Biden is notionally in the lead there right now. But caucus states (as Hillary '08 found to her disadvantage) are organisation heavy states. Buttigieg will have the better on the ground operation, and Biden will have just lost two states in a row, possibly getting a fairly pitiful number of delegates. I think Nevada goes to Warren.
The point about all this is that Bloomberg is going to be nowhere when these things are happening. Blanketing California in adverts means nothing if there is an existing moderate Democratic champion. Bloomberg needs Buttigieg to sink without a trace, and not be replaced by another moderate. And he needs Biden to continue to show his age.
I don't find the 3% on Bloomberg winning the nomination to be an attractive price.
Her reaction was 'just what we need, another rich old white man'
She is likely to go for Warren, without much enthusiasm. Then Pete unless Amy or Kamala get momentum.
An anecdote of one slightly bemused (by the original size of the field) and frustrated (by the profile of the candidates) Democrat from California.
I’m a little surprised that OGH is so keen on a hubristic septuagenarian considering his views on Biden’s candidacy.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/26/health/us-life-expectancy-decline-study/index.html
I'm more interested in why Warren is a frontrunner and Cory Booker is nowhere. In many ways he seems a more appealing candidate. And although there isn't a lot of Trump vs Booker polling, in the latest Wisconsin poll (Nov 13 -17) he is the only Dem candidate (out of 6) beating Trump.
The priamry process rewards ruthless organising skill and the ability to captivate a crowd. Buttigieg has the first in spades (hence the fact that he's outraising Biden and has a fabulous operation in Iowa), and manages OK with the second. Sanders manages both, of course. Although the fact he looks older than his 78 years does him no favours.
From the BBC!
Who that helps or hinders is unclear to me. I can see a lot of moderate republicans appalled by Trump finding such a candidature attractive. Both of the American parties have fallen victim to the sort of capture we have seen in Labour here. They are much weaker than they were in 1996.
He is in many ways a much more serious candidate than Ross Perot was because he has actual experience of substantial public office as a Republican in a Democratic State. At the moment all his guns are focused on Trump but that may well be because he is seeking the Democratic nomination. I suspect if he runs as an independent he will be having a go at both sides in equal measure.
But if moderate, telegenic Buttigieg wins Iowa, then what chance does Bloomberg have? Unless all the moderates crash and burn, what's Bloomerg's pitch?
But not in a good way.
The question is whether it will shift votes. I'm not convinced that it will.
I wonder why Labour did not prepare adequately for this interview. They may have just guaranteed a conservative landslide.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/mar/07/life-expectancy-slumps-by-five-months
It varies a lot by region. Hartlepool is our own West Virginia.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/may/06/smoking-drinking-drugs-why-life-expectancy-low-hartlepool
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50567979
Many people may now be motivated to watch the interview which is not to Labours advantage.
When I hear the word software upgrade, I reach for my gun.
I haven't, of course, spoken to her this morning; may be that she'll phone her Grannie sometime today, and I'll have the chance to ask her.
"Twill also be interesting to talk to her brother and sister-in-law when we see them on Sunday.
Have to admit that while I was swinging towards Labour form LD (over nuclear weapons) anti-semitism would swing me back again.
https://www.actuaries.org.uk/news-and-insights/media-centre/media-releases-and-statements/longer-term-influences-driving-lower-life-expectancy-projections
This more recent paper gives the same message. The truth is disappointing enough without shoddy reporting as well:
https://www.theactuary.com/news/2019/10/life-expectancy-gains-in-uk-among-worst-in-developed-world/
It might change a few votes, I don’t think the shift will be dramatic because all of the party leaders are getting one of these and I can’t see Boris faring much better to be honest.
To ultra left wing socialists there is a simple equation.
All Capitalists are evil
All Jews are Capitalists
Therefore...…. work it out for yourselves.
When I was a Young Conservative, most of my closest friends were Jewish, members of the East Renfewshire Young Conservatives chaired by one Jackson Carlaw. To think of them being described in the way they are by the cabal around Corbyn makes my stomach heave! Another group of my friends were the sons of Glasgow's Muslim businessmen, some of whom had started businesses in Glasgow within months of being expelled from Uganda by Idi Amin. Both groups mixed socially with total ease and were more likely to be in conflict if they supported one Glasgow football team rather than its well known rival. There was no visible racial tension with or between either group. I just cannot fathom this visceral hatred of some members of our minority groups who are lovely, law abiding folks and have contributed massively to our country. Fanatics of any sort are the problem, not whether people attend places of faith on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday, if at all!
I don’t think taking tax credits away was a tax rise either.
I can see what the perception might be but I don’t feel it’s a rise if I’m honest
Either way, by trying to fix an injustice to one group of pensioners, he will cause hardship to all of them.
Or more likely of course, the WASPI women will get fobbed off with a promise - a Govt. bond. Because that isn't Govt. debt, is it Labour? *slaps forehead in despair*
But the key problem for Labour is the admission they did not tell the truth in their manifesto.
I think it’s priced in and people don’t care
The lead story.
Well done Andrew Neil....
"Will my tax go up?"
"Er...."
"Will my take home pay go down?"
"Er....yes"
"So how is my tax going up and my take home pay going down not a tax rise?"
"Er...Vote Labour!"
The idea that it is only a tax rise when the actual rate is changed is frankly absurd. Even Corbyn is not that stupid. He is dishonest though.
I don't really mind who wins the nomination, they'll all be infinitely better than Trump. Is Biden really the Democrats best chance of beating Trump?
Word of the campaign.
(I am referring to why it is all over the Tory supporting newspapers, not why the Jewish community are complaining about it - their concerns are valid but lots of people have valid concerns that the newspapers don't plaster all over their front pages for days on end in the midst of an election campaign).
Really? You think people are this stupid?
Which is probably conclusive evidence that he has no chance.
She’s been canvassing in them.
OK, Bishop Auckland, and maybe Durham itself. But for the rest? If they’re marginal at the moment pile on Jo Swinson as next LOTO.
On Waspi Toenails gave Burgon a torrid time on R4 “ Why should Theresa May get £22,000? And who will pay?”
I wouldn’t trust him to get planning permission for a porch.
The change doesn’t really bring in that much money anyway and rubbishes Labours no increases for 95% of the population. And I’m saying this as a Labour supporter .
Did Labour really think they could slip this into their grey book and no one would find out ? I do feel the wheels are coming off at the moment and Labour really need some major gaffe from Johnson otherwise I can’t see anything other than at least a decent majority for the Tories .
Darlington is likely to be close or even lost but I missed the first set of Labour canvassers as they came on Saturday afternoon.
Postal votes in Darlington have not yet arrived so that may also have a slight impact.
One would hope that ISAs and pensions would be exempt from Labour`s plans but I don`t think this has been confirmed.
The main effect of the anti-semitism story is taking up another news cycle, and thus denying the Labour campaign the oxygen of publicity which may stall its momentum.
So I could see him spaffing a lot of money on Super Tuesday, achieving disappointing results and then pulling out.
Maybe his main effect will be to simply challenge some of the other contenders from the moderate centre, which may at least add another dimension to the debates (if he gets into them).
Their finances in the Manifesto are a rancid midden.
Labour is trying to exploit that by inserting a crowbar into that crack, and levering it open.
A late pledge by Boris to cut the 6% tax rate on student loans would more than counter it. Not just with the young going to uni, but with their parents too.
What I think he was trying to say was that the bonds issued for nationalisation would be largely self funding because the State would take the profits of the businesses that they have acquired which would allow them to pay the interest on the bonds.
There are a series of assumptions built into this which could be usefully unpacked. Firstly, there is the assumption that the bond markets are willing to lend a Corbyn led government £0.5trn. Secondly, there is the assumption that they would do so at current rates. Thirdly, there is the assumption that despite a rapid deterioration in our creditworthiness it would be possible to roll over these bonds at similar rates in the future. Fourthly, there is the assumption that these businesses would in fact remain profitable in public hands when politicians face pressure if they try to increase water bills etc. or reduce unemployment by getting these businesses to employ more people.
The whole policy is 1970s redux. It didn't work. It hasn't worked anywhere else. It won't work here. It's just stupid. Really, really stupid.
But it’s still hard to imagine that Labour are nervous about their vote in County Durham.
The AS stuff won't hurt Labour, this will and the lack of an answer on where the £58bn comes from.