Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After the latest Democratic debate watch Klobuchar
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After the latest Democratic debate watch Klobuchar
Amy Klobuchar won the debate, writes @mattklewis https://t.co/gycj3wPEWj
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The sells are: Bloomberg, Clinton, Yang and Sanders.
Labour and LibDems played politics - 'dicking around' and thus putting off a huge number of people. The Democrats are now doing exactly the same.
I'd put money on Trump's re-election.
'The other candidate I thought did well was Biden, who really had his first gaffe-free debate all campaign. That’s perhaps damning with faint praise, but I think he actually had some real highs — his answer on immigration, for instance — in addition to the lack of obvious stumbles. And he probably benefits from the fighting among some of the other candidates.'
I know people get sick of drawn-out contests but Labour could really do with a process like this; Everybody gets a moment in the spotlight where they're properly tested, and they all come out of it better at politics than they were when they went in.
On a personal note, taking my wife to hospital today for a, so far, four times delayed gall-bladder removal. No cancellation phone call so far. After the last time I wrote to complain, so maybe........
She's not due for admission though until 11.30 so still time for postponement, if past experience is any guide.
Which is a long way around of saying, not yet but I'm going to. I will probably wait until Day 1 of the impeachment hearings and then strike.
The impeachment will go nowhere and Trump will use it annoyingly brilliantly to pump his people vs politicians meme. The rest will be history.
It seems to be the most assured route to success nowadays. Lies, dishonesty and corruption. Perhaps it was ever thus and Nixon was just inept at it.
I suspect the answer to the first question is that it doesn't matter. Indeed, lots of people competing for the nomination (and getting vicious with each other) doesn't seem to have any negative impacts. (See Trump '16.)
The second question I think works more in Trump's favour. Like it or not, most Americans don't think about Ukraine, and explaining what exactly Trump did that was impeachable... is not that easy.
A much bigger (potential) issue for Trump is the claim that a Trump political appointee attempted to influence the auditing of the President's tax returns. If that turns out to be true, then that is much more serious. But we're probably six to nine months away from knowing the full story.
One other thing: Christianity Today, one of the biggest Evangelical Christian magazines in the US and formerly a Trump supporter, has just come out with a blistering editorial against him. Now, you shouldn't read too much into this, but in many ways Trump has already delivered to the Evangelicals - he's given them the Judges they want (and that will influence the US for decades to come). What he offers from here on in is much more limited.
I’m trying to see how that works, and struggling.
I don't think it'll do much with Trump either way; Their side support it, the other side oppose it. But there's probably a benefit to forcing purple-state GOP senators to side with Trump, especially as Trump is likely to go on to commit *more* crimes, especially if he loses and has 3 months as a lame duck with nothing to lose, and they can also pin those on the senators who voted to keep him in office.
He’s delivered (or at least been seen and believed to deliver) for his base, and the Democrats are unlikely to put up anyone inspiring.
The culture wars in the US will do the rest, on the basis he’s “our sack of shit”.
From the evangelical Christian perspective, you'd presumably much rather have Pence than Trump?
A better dark horse in that situation might be Al Gore, at least Dems generally think he won his election.
Utter insanity.
Clinton carries too much baggage in my view, but what do I know.
I hope she doesn't get it. I'd like to be green on one US election race...
In the rust belt states that Hilary lost the Dems vote fell by up to 10 percentage points. Trump caused the Republican vote to rise by a point or 2.
Pelosi's impeachment strategy is that it doesn't matter of Trump's base solidifies, that base is too low if the Dems even claw back just half their voter loses.
If Warren is the candidate, I think Trump probably walks it. The others, it's a harder call.
Ed Milliband has entirely missed the point, he views policy as a sliding scale of spending. 2015 wasn't enough, 2019 was too much and 2017 was juuuuust right. All of this ignores the context of whom they were facing, when and the parties reputation (which is borderline trashed at the moment). You can tell he is a wonk as a result.
The FT had a really, really good breakdown of what happened and highlighted something that was partly missed by analysts in 2017; May was angling to move the party towards the more blue collar marker in her election, she failed but she built a base and direction. Johnson has capitalised on this by framing the election more clearly.
The Labour party have not learnt from the result, in fact the rhetoric has gotten worse from some of the MP's. Angela Eagle tweeted that Dominic Cummings plans to reform Whitehall were 'alt-right', because of course the two things are directly linked. Other MP's and senior figures in and around the party keep talking about fear and disapointment about what has happened, not many of them talk about the defeat itself.
I am no Johnson fan, haven't been since he failed in the Foreign Office but he is either the luckiest general alive or he knows how to use context and people to get what he wants. In Cummings he may have genuinely found someone who could change the way we do government, I mean it may be all nonsense but someone has to take on this change at some point so at least some kind of process can be started.
I am wise.
Not the kind of odds which are attractive at such long range
I'm not overly tempted.
(Edit. 66-1 to win the Presidency. 40-1 for the Dem nomination.)
https://brexitcentral.com/the-brexit-party-actually-saved-the-labour-party-from-annihilation-last-week-in-places-like-sunderland/
I am green on Warren, Buttigeig and Klobuchar, but the latter is my big winner for nominee. I shall see how the land lies for POTUS after the nominee is clear.
On the one hand Trump is an appalling human being without a single redeeming feature, but on the other hand POTUS usually gets a second term, and he was just as appalling last time around. Amy just seems too normal to be in this freak show.
And we're getting darker this side of the pond.
So says The Times.
They really did play silly buggers, much as I admire people like Dominic Grieve. Anna Soubry was one of the worst offenders.
I said back in the day that they should have voted through Theresa May's deal which was a better Brexit than Johnson's. They got cocky and have now lost. Johnson has carte blanche to deliver any Brexit he wishes.
I am not convinced that "social conservatives" want to see the BBC trashed and privatised. It is one of the most respected UK brands worldwide,and Increasingly our exports are of the softer cultural type.
Looking at the map, even if we give him Florida, he needs to recreate his success in states like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania.
His net approval in those swing states don't look great at the moment either.
OH (-5), MI (-14), PA (-7). https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump-2/
So it won’t be all plain sailing.
That not one of these Remainers prevaricated before voting with the ERG should have made them stop and think. It didn't.
It is only by destroying our relationship with our friends and neighbours that we will learn to appreciate what we will lose, and come back to a more constructive approach. Tis a pity the damage done in the meantime.
It is worth noting that while the parliamentary arithmetic has changed, the underlying electoral arithmetic has not. A week ago more people voted against BoZo's deal than for it. It is built on very fragile foundations.
And the sooner the abbheration of being taxed to watch TV in under to fund Radio ends the better.
Even socialists can have common sense
I'm sure they will be just as adept at using the civil courts as the criminal, though.
Oh well its history now. Thanks a lot Soubry, Grieve and co for ensuring we get a proper Brexit.
Fine! If you think its great, you pay for it. What's stopping you? If it is on a voluntary subscription model rather than a compulsory subscription model then you will still be able to fund it if you want to.
With May's "no hard borders" between the EU and the UK Sindy could be quite straight forward (setting aside the money issues(!)) - now with a Boris Brexit there will be a border in the Irish sea, and if Sindy wanted to join the EU, between Scotland and its largest market (more than 3 times the size of the EU) too.
For one thing, the Dems won the senate seat there in 2018, 53.4 to 46.6 (and a bigger margin than in 2012). For another, John Kasich might be a spoiler/endorse another candidate. Finally, Ohio has been targeted by China in the trade war - they may blame Trump for that.
The trial had over a dozen different acceptable forms of ID, and for those who had none of them the council would provide a specific voter ID, for free, upon request.
No malarkey
And it simply stores up trouble for the future. If the consequences of what is signed up to turn out to be less than optimal, the government has nowhere to hide and has no consensus for what it has agreed.
https://twitter.com/Labourpaul/status/1207937045609504768?s=20
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1207938580540203008?s=20
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/five-things-we-have-learnt-about-englands-voter-id-trials-in-the-2019-local-elections/
How is that any worse than the scrutiny we had when the EU negotiated FTAs?
Those CDE older folk in the Northern Wall may be rather more socially conservative and not see the Beeb broken up.
We have not even had any discussion of Britain’s negotiating mandate or priorities during the election campaign and, unlike the US or EU, have not even set these out anywhere. And the executive in the WB is seeking to give itself extensive Henry VIII powers to do what it wants without regard to anyone else.
How this is meant to be an improvement or any sort of meaningful taking back of control is a mystery to me.
The legislature holds the executive to account through multiple means and Select Committees etc
Our taking back control happens at elections.