politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bernie soars on Betfair after the poll non-release fiasco

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bernie soars on Betfair after the poll non-release fiasco

Those UK based American political obsessives like me who stayed up till 2 in the morning for the release of the the Des Moines Register Iowa poll went to bed disappointed. There was no poll as the previous post sets out.

Read the full story here

HYUFD

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

OldKingCole

Second. Like Trump in November.

speedy2

Looking at Google Trends, interest in Bernie Sanders has surged in Iowa since Thursday and is the only candidate who has surged.

Not the best metric, but since we don't have any polls what are we going to do ?

HYUFD

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

kle4

OldKingCole said:

Second. Like Trump in November.

Just so long as its in the Electoral College this time!

MikeSmithson

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

edmundintokyo

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

speedy2

By the way there should be strong correlation between who wins Iowa and who wins the nomination.

Sanders is very close in overtaking Biden in the national average, any win in Iowa will push him over.

HYUFD

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

Terrible for the whole Democratic establishment if indeed Sanders is ahead in Iowa and Warren is second

MarqueeMark

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Betfair punters buying the conspiracy theory.....

MaxPB

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

edmundintokyo

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

MarqueeMark

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

For hands that do lizards....

HYUFD

OldKingCole said:

Second. Like Trump in November.

If the Democratic voters are surging to Sanders and Warren ie left liberal populists the Donald's chances of re election will be greatly increased, his camp will run ads that ensure independent voters will be fearful of socialism coming to America much as Boris and the Tories spooked swing voters about Corbyn

kle4

Keeping OGH up until 2am and then no poll is not on - PB won't forget this, Iowa caucauses, mark my words!

Quincel

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Is there any evidence that those numbers are correct, or reason to believe Mike Cernovich has access to the real numbers? Or indeed that the real numbers exist? If the poll was pulled partway through it's entirely possible the DMR never finished weighting etc and not even Ann Seltzer herself knows the pulled numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Cernovich

HYUFD

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

MarqueeMark

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

Second. Like Trump in November.

If the Democratic voters are surging to Sanders and Warren ie left liberal populists the Donald's chances of re election will be greatly increased, his camp will run ads that ensure independent voters will be fearful of socialism coming to America much as Boris and the Tories spooked swing voters about Corbyn

Attack ads fearfully predicting the "United States of Venezeula" will have real political bite in the US.

tlg86

Is today the day that a male tennis player born in the 1990s finally wins a slam?

edmundintokyo

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

I didn't say I think the numbers are implausible, I just see no evidence they're real.

speedy2

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

edmundintokyo

Here's the product the "journalist" who posted those polling numbers sells in case anybody thinks he's trustworthy, and also want to be young again.

https://twitter.com/MustangGirl3/status/1149526486136680448/photo/4

HYUFD

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

I didn't say I think the numbers are implausible, I just see no evidence they're real.

We will see tomorrow night but if indeed Sanders wins with Warren runner up, it will be the Democratic establishment with egg on its face not Cernovich and the DMR will have serious questions to answer as to why it did not release what was a pretty accurate poll

edmundintokyo

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

I didn't say I think the numbers are implausible, I just see no evidence they're real.

We will see tomorrow night but if indeed Sanders wins with Warren runner up, it will be the Democratic establishment with egg on its face not Cernovich and the DMR will have serious questions to answer as to why it did not release what was a pretty accurate poll

No, candidates showing up in more-or-less that order wouldn't make those numbers genuine. (Nor the opposite TBF, caucuses are hard to poll.)

Quincel

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

But anyone seeking to fake the numbers could look at the previous poll to keep their lie plausible. And real poll numbers in the final days of Iowa often look implausible due to sudden surges. The question isn't "Do the numbers look genuine?" it is "Do we know if they are genuine?"

Quincel

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

I didn't say I think the numbers are implausible, I just see no evidence they're real.

We will see tomorrow night but if indeed Sanders wins with Warren runner up, it will be the Democratic establishment with egg on its face not Cernovich and the DMR will have serious questions to answer as to why it did not release what was a pretty accurate poll

Are you saying pollsters should release polls where they have concerns about the data just because they might be right anyway? I don't think that would enhance the usefulness of polling data.

Casino_Royale

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

HYUFD

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

I didn't say I think the numbers are implausible, I just see no evidence they're real.

We will see tomorrow night but if indeed Sanders wins with Warren runner up, it will be the Democratic establishment with egg on its face not Cernovich and the DMR will have serious questions to answer as to why it did not release what was a pretty accurate poll

No, candidates showing up in more-or-less that order wouldn't make those numbers genuine. (Nor the opposite TBF, caucuses are hard to poll.)

The DMR managed to pretty accurately poll the Iowa caucuses in previous election years and would seem to have done so again, it would look like a Democratic establishment cover up to try and stop Bernie, which ironically will just increase his momentum further and his likelihood of ending up nominee

edmundintokyo

Casino_Royale said:

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

A bit of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn was enough to win him the leadership elections though...

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

John McDonnell on Marr this morning said he was very much hoping and looking forward to a Sanders administration for anyone who doubted the links between UK Corbynites and Sanders supporters in the US

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g25m36FqfAA
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/30/the-us-sanders-campaigners-lending-corybn-hand-bernie-momentum

Casino_Royale

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

A bit of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn was enough to win him the leadership elections though...

This is true.

I might have to suck it up and just put a lot more money on Sanders.

They look crazy enough to do it.

MarqueeMark

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

Oh, Jeremy Corbyn?

HYUFD

Quincel said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

FPT

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

That poll has now been leaked anyway and if the leaked poll turns out to be close to the actual result the only 'dodgy practices' will look like pressure from the Democratic establishment not sampling error

Some (generally unreliable) people have posted something they claim is a leak of the poll, I don't think we have evidence that it's genuine at this point?

The leak was by a journalist with a blue tick and does not look too dissimilar to the last DMR poll just with Sanders and Warren expanding the gap over Buttigieg and Biden

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

Very loose sense of the word "journalist" there. And the blue tick just means Twitter validated your identity, it doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Did you order the Cernovich skin cream???

The last official DMR Iowa poll released was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks very plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

But anyone seeking to fake the numbers could look at the previous poll to keep their lie plausible. And real poll numbers in the final days of Iowa often look implausible due to sudden surges. The question isn't "Do the numbers look genuine?" it is "Do we know if they are genuine?"

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223813090103431168?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223816700984004609?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223820548087656448?s=20

Casino_Royale

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

eek

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

A bit of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn was enough to win him the leadership elections though...

This is true.

I might have to suck it up and just put a lot more money on Sanders.

They look crazy enough to do it.

Could be a second Christmas present for the Donald, he trails Biden but leads Sanders in the popular vote in the latest national poll


https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1223311559625019392?s=20

Quincel

HYUFD said:

Quincel said:

But anyone seeking to fake the numbers could look at the previous poll to keep their lie plausible. And real poll numbers in the final days of Iowa often look implausible due to sudden surges. The question isn't "Do the numbers look genuine?" it is "Do we know if they are genuine?"

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223813090103431168?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223816700984004609?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223820548087656448?s=20

None of those give any information as to whether the numbers Cernovich tweeted are genuine or not. That's what I care about, not who is at fault here.

kinabalu

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

HYUFD

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

So would Trump's re election, which a Sanders nomination probably makes slightly more likely

edmundintokyo

Quincel said:

None of those give any information as to whether the numbers Cernovich tweeted are genuine or not. That's what I care about, not who is at fault here.

And Nate Silver does in fact have a take about that.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223805389696905221

HYUFD

Quincel said:

HYUFD said:

Quincel said:

But anyone seeking to fake the numbers could look at the previous poll to keep their lie plausible. And real poll numbers in the final days of Iowa often look implausible due to sudden surges. The question isn't "Do the numbers look genuine?" it is "Do we know if they are genuine?"

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223813090103431168?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223816700984004609?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1223820548087656448?s=20

None of those give any information as to whether the numbers Cernovich tweeted are genuine or not. That's what I care about, not who is at fault here.

We will find out tomorrow night, if Sanders wins Cernovich will be able to crow for the rest of the year and the Dem establishment's nightmare year will only just be getting under way

Casino_Royale

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

Casino_Royale

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

maaarsh

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

It's jolly decent of you chaps to keep investing in pipe dreams and leaving the field clear for the rest of us.

edmundintokyo

HYUFD said:

We will find out tomorrow night, if Sanders wins Cernovich will be able to crow for the rest of the year

If you're having trouble reading the thread from after you made this obviously wrong comment before, you may need to wash the skin cream out of your eyes

Philip_Thompson

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

I'd rather see Trump out but what do I know?

HYUFD

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

We will find out tomorrow night, if Sanders wins Cernovich will be able to crow for the rest of the year

If you're having trouble reading the thread from after you made this obviously wrong comment before, you may need to wash the skin cream out of your eyes

I have made no wrong comments at all, you are just completely unable to accept the fact this looks like a Democratic establishment and Buttigieg campaign cover up and a Sanders win will only reinforce that perception

DavidL

A Sanders win in the low 20s seems credible to me. He has his fan base. It’s not as big as it was 4 years ago but it’s there and with a widely split opposition that will be enough. The sane wing of the party really needs to choose and get its act together.

Alistair

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

edmundintokyo

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

We will find out tomorrow night, if Sanders wins Cernovich will be able to crow for the rest of the year

If you're having trouble reading the thread from after you made this obviously wrong comment before, you may need to wash the skin cream out of your eyes

I have made no wrong comments at all, you are just completely unable to accept the fact this looks like a Democratic establishment and Buttigieg campaign cover up and a Sanders win will only reinforce that perception

I'm completely able to accept that fact, it's exactly right and that's probably why Cernovich posted the numbers that he did. But that doesn't make the numbers the actual result of the Selzer poll, and neither will a win by Sanders, which is what a bunch of other polls are showing.

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

RobD

kle4 said:

Keeping OGH up until 2am and then no poll is not on - PB won't forget this, Iowa caucauses, mark my words!

They will rue the day.

HYUFD

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

edmundintokyo

Here's a selection of alternative Selzer leaks for balance:

https://twitter.com/theinquisitr/status/1223899191753281536
https://twitter.com/LindaHagge/status/1223847686715203585
https://twitter.com/ARiverBear/status/1223844783753437187
https://twitter.com/dexterbeagle3/status/1223853912043802624/photo/1

Alistair

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

alex_

Here’s a controversial thought. Maybe the DMR really did just screw up the poll...?

Alistair

edmundintokyo said:

Here's a selection of alternative Selzer leaks for balance:

https://twitter.com/theinquisitr/status/1223899191753281536

One of those had a blue tick. It must be True. Sell Bernie. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

At least a little bit of scepticism from some on here before blasting out how. Rock solid certain they are about sources of information would do us all good.

HYUFD

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

alex_

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

glw

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

I'd rather see Trump out but what do I know?

The only thing Democrats should be thinking about is beating Trump, all the arguments about candidates and policies are secondary to that, because anyone is better than Trump.

OldKingCole

Just for once I agree with Mr HYUFD; we'll have to wait for the actual figures.
For myself, so long as it's someone who can and will beat Trump I don't mind too much. I'd like to see a successful female candidate, just to break that particular glass ceiling, though.

Edit: Sp & FFS.

HYUFD

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

The DMR Poll has correctly predicted the Iowa caucuses winner for the last 3 decades, as I said we will find out tomorrow which leak was right or not (and we can also use the DMR poll from early January which looked remarkably similar to the Cernovich leaked poll)

alex_

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

The DMR Poll has correctly predicted the Iowa caucuses winner for the last 3 decades, as I said we will find out tomorrow which leak was right or not (and we can also use the DMR poll from early January which looked remarkably similar to the Cernovich leaked poll)

Or it was actually a duff poll and therefore not a reliable predictor of the result.

Sandpit

edmundintokyo said:

Here's a selection of alternative Selzer leaks for balance:

ttps://twitter.com/theinquisitr/status/1223899191753281536
ttps://twitter.com/LindaHagge/status/1223847686715203585
ttps://twitter.com/ARiverBear/status/1223844783753437187
ttps://twitter.com/dexterbeagle3/status/1223853912043802624/photo/1

So, there's at least five different sets of numbers being circulated, all of which claim to be the 'real' numbers that were never published. Hmmm...

Casino_Royale

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

HYUFD

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

The DMR Poll has correctly predicted the Iowa caucuses winner for the last 3 decades, as I said we will find out tomorrow which leak was right or not (and we can also use the DMR poll from early January which looked remarkably similar to the Cernovich leaked poll)

Or it was actually a duff poll and therefore not a reliable predictor of the result.

The pressure not to release it came from the Buttigieg campaign which tells us a lot, pluS the last published Iowa DMR poll from January had Sanders ahead so that can be used as a marker

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

Theuniondivvie

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

speedy2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

If that is correct that is terrible for Biden.

The goal of Trump propagandists like Cernovich is to build up a We Woz Robbed narrative to break off the Bernie Bros from any non-Bernie nominee, it's probably not a good idea to base your betting on their tweets...

I agree, I prefer to base it on this:

https://twitter.com/michaelsayman/status/1223778245369139200

Sanders is the only candidate apart from Trump that can fill a stadium.
Looking at the attendance of the other candidates, they combined couldn't fill it

Oh, Bernard Sanders.

A bit of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn was enough to win him the leadership elections though...

This is true.

I might have to suck it up and just put a lot more money on Sanders.

They look crazy enough to do it.

Could be a second Christmas present for the Donald, he trails Biden but leads Sanders in the popular vote in the latest national poll


https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1223311559625019392?s=20

Bernie looking quite geriatric there. Time for some Youth Serum...

DavidL

glw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

I'd rather see Trump out but what do I know?

The only thing Democrats should be thinking about is beating Trump, all the arguments about candidates and policies are secondary to that, because anyone is better than Trump.

Whilst this is true the choices are bordering on rank.

Bernie Sanders, not even a Democrat, very likely to put off independents and moderates, probably lose badly.

Joe Biden, bordering on gaga and he wasn't the sharpest tool in the box to start with. Would lose badly.

Elizabeth Warren. Has a slight folksy charm but the Pocahontas jibe was just the beginning. Would lose badly.

Pete Buttigieg. Inexperienced, mixed record as a Mayor of a smallish town, would lose badly.

Bloomberg. Probably more of a threat to Trump than most but has absolutely no chance in a party willing to think about Sanders for more than a nanosecond.

Klobuchar. Again a folksy charm but seems incredibly ineffectual and a long way from being ready for such a job. Would lose badly.

So what do they do? Swallow their reservations and choose Bloomberg to get rid of a dangerous maniac or indulge their fantasies in the belief that the majority can be swung around to their way of thinking? I think the answer to that is found in the choices Labour made post 2017.

isam

For real?

Sandpit

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

I'm sure that four years of "Aspire to do well for yourself? Well, we will put your taxes up" will go down well with those on middle incomes - many of whom in the trades have been dragged into the 40% net by fiscal drag over the years.

alex_

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

The DMR Poll has correctly predicted the Iowa caucuses winner for the last 3 decades, as I said we will find out tomorrow which leak was right or not (and we can also use the DMR poll from early January which looked remarkably similar to the Cernovich leaked poll)

Or it was actually a duff poll and therefore not a reliable predictor of the result.

The pressure not to release it came from the Buttigieg campaign which tells us a lot, pluS the last published Iowa DMR poll from January had Sanders ahead so that can be used as a marker

Er, it tells you his was the name left off the list! No wonder he didn’t want it released!

Alistair

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

Top 5% in the UK.

RobD

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

The Des Moines Iowa poll has been leaked on twitter by a blue tick journalist and has Sanders ahead and Warren second, which is probably why Sanders has surged on Betfair

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1223804822891032576?s=20

A blue tick journalist. Take a look at yourself. He present the Alex Jones show.

He a well known conspiracy theorist

Last official DMR Iowa poll was Sanders 20, Warren 17, Buttigieg 16, Biden 15 so it looks entirely plausible

https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/01/10/rel1_ia.-.democrats.pdf

So, the question is not about whether the poll numbers are plausible. I could make up fake but plausible numbers.

The question is whether a conspiracy theorist who presents a show with a conspiracy theorist so egregious he has had his twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts suspended is a trustworthy source of information.

As I said we will find out tomorrow night, given DMR historically has predicted the winner we will find out who was accurately leaking and who was not then

How? We will find out the Iowa result, not what the poll said.

The DMR Poll has correctly predicted the Iowa caucuses winner for the last 3 decades, as I said we will find out tomorrow which leak was right or not (and we can also use the DMR poll from early January which looked remarkably similar to the Cernovich leaked poll)

Or it was actually a duff poll and therefore not a reliable predictor of the result.

The pressure not to release it came from the Buttigieg campaign which tells us a lot, pluS the last published Iowa DMR poll from January had Sanders ahead so that can be used as a marker

Er, it tells you his was the name left off the list! No wonder he didn’t want it released!

I think he was on it, just that it wasn't read out in one interview.

alex_

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

Endillion

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

To be fair to Starmer, he's currently saying what he needs to say to the party membership (aka actual Lefty morons) to get elected. Once he's done that he can start saying what he needs to say to win the next election. It's the equivalent of Johnson throwing around nonsense about letterboxes in the Telegraph, about nine months ago.

HYUFD

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

Top 5% in the UK.

Even more so the case then

Alistair

On that National poll with Trump beating everyone but Biden, IBD has a notoriously Republican lean polling bias, their eve of election poll had Trump winning nationally by 2 points.

DavidL

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

As someone with a good income and no money I couldn't agree more!

HYUFD

Sandpit said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

I'm sure that four years of "Aspire to do well for yourself? Well, we will put your taxes up" will go down well with those on middle incomes - many of whom in the trades have been dragged into the 40% net by fiscal drag over the years.

McCain thought the same thing in 2008, remember 'Joe the Plumber' but Obama still won the election after 8 years of President Bush with a promise to raise taxes on high earners

HYUFD

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

Not so sure about that, Obama won in 2008 and in 2012 in the US promising to raise taxes on the rich, as narrowly did Hollande in France in 2012 and as did Trudeau in Canada, just, last autumn.

Centre left promises to increase tax on middle income voters may be fatal but promises to tax the rich more are not necessarily

80,000 per year isn't rich.

It is for 90% of the population, £80,000 a year may not get you into the top 1% of earners but it will comfortably get you into the top 10% of earners in the UK

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

And Labour is also still committed to reversing the Osborne inheritance tax cut and increasing capital gains tax I believe

edmundintokyo

RobD said:

alex_ said:

HYUFD said:

The pressure not to release it came from the Buttigieg campaign which tells us a lot, pluS the last published Iowa DMR poll from January had Sanders ahead so that can be used as a marker

Er, it tells you his was the name left off the list! No wonder he didn’t want it released!

I think he was on it, just that it wasn't read out in one interview.

The sequence of events as reported seems to be something like:
* Interviewer reads the (randomized) list with Mayor Pete left off it to a Mayor Pete enthusiast
* Mayor Pete enthusiast tells Mayor Pete campaign
* Mayor Pete campaign complains
* Selzer / DMR go "oh shit, they're right" and pull the poll

It's not clear that Mayor Pete's campaign actually knew the result at the time they complained; I doubt they did, because if they had the numbers then presumably the other campaigns also had the numbers, and if the other campaigns also had the numbers then they'd have leaked before the announcement, and we'd have more authoritative leaks after the announcement of the cancellation.

HYUFD

Alistair said:

On that National poll with Trump beating everyone but Biden, IBD has a notoriously Republican lean polling bias, their eve of election poll had Trump winning nationally by 2 points.

The final IBD 2016 poll had Hillary ahead by 1% and she won the popular vote by 2%, so was almost spot on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#cite_note-ibd071116-9

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

kinabalu

alex_ said:

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

I'd say it's both. But, yes, with the emphasis more on wealth. Bird in the hand etc.

viewcode

speedy2 said:

Looking at Google Trends, interest in Bernie Sanders has surged in Iowa since Thursday and is the only candidate who has surged.

Not the best metric, but since we don't have any polls what are we going to do ?

Replacing a lack of information with rumour and sources of unknown veracity is not an improvement.

HYUFD

kinabalu said:

alex_ said:

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

I'd say it's both. But, yes, with the emphasis more on wealth. Bird in the hand etc.

With rising house prices etc there are also a lot of people who are more asset rich than income rich. Indeed a rise in inheritance tax would likely hit more voters than a increase income tax for those earning more than £80,000 a year

matt

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

His period of reflection, as I have said, appears to have ended in “We were right, one more heave”. Yes, it’s a reflection of the electorate he faces but even so, it suggests (as many of his other actions have) that he’s a follower not a leader.

Endillion

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

On that National poll with Trump beating everyone but Biden, IBD has a notoriously Republican lean polling bias, their eve of election poll had Trump winning nationally by 2 points.

The final IBD 2016 poll had Hillary ahead by 1% and she won the popular vote by 2%, so was almost spot on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#cite_note-ibd071116-9

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Out by a full 100%. How is that "almost spot on"?

HYUFD

matt said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

His period of reflection, as I have said, appears to have ended in “We were right, one more heave”. Yes, it’s a reflection of the electorate he faces but even so, it suggests (as many of his other actions have) that he’s a follower not a leader.

His main shifts have been on pushing for free movement to enable a return to the single market and abandoning scrapping private schools and pledging to fight anti Semitism.

Other than that his agenda largely matches Corbyn's

kinabalu

HYUFD said:

So would Trump's re election, which a Sanders nomination probably makes slightly more likely

Trumps re-election would be the opposite of countering recent disappointments for the Left. But I note and approve of that "slightly" there. It's new and it indicates to me that you are moving away from this "Sanders is too Left to beat Trump" sentiment which IMO is becoming sterile groupthink.

HYUFD

Endillion said:

HYUFD said:

Alistair said:

On that National poll with Trump beating everyone but Biden, IBD has a notoriously Republican lean polling bias, their eve of election poll had Trump winning nationally by 2 points.

The final IBD 2016 poll had Hillary ahead by 1% and she won the popular vote by 2%, so was almost spot on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#cite_note-ibd071116-9

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Out by a full 100%. How is that "almost spot on"?

Out by a mere 1%.

On that level of accuracy the IBD poll I posted earlier would still have Trump beating Sanders and still have Biden the only Democrat leading Trump in the popular vote

HYUFD

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

So would Trump's re election, which a Sanders nomination probably makes slightly more likely

Hardly. Trumps re-election would be the opposite of countering recent disappointments for the Left. But anyway, I note and approve of that "slightly" there. It's new and it indicates to me that you are moving away from this "Sanders is too Left to beat Trump" sentiment which IMO is becoming sterile groupthink.

Well anyone can win an election but a Biden or Bloomberg nomination makes it slightly less likely that Trump will be re elected while a Sanders or Warren nomination makes it slightly more likely Trump will be re elected as the IBD poll confirms

Malmesbury

On topic : Pulling the poll was the right thing to do. The correct reaction to such a problem is to stop, and investigate whether there were *other* problems in the poll - and other polls previously carried out. Then fix those issues. Then carry out another poll.

Just patching the poll by removing "problem" numbers would be unscientific.

Fishing

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

This is a fantastic article from the Wall Street Journal in 1975 which shows where that thinking leads:

http://www.newlearner.com/courses/hts/cia4u/ecoho82.htm

"Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".

(Although the next sentence, "Since we're following down the same road, perhaps we'll meet again", is rarely quoted).

OldKingCole

HYUFD said:

matt said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

His period of reflection, as I have said, appears to have ended in “We were right, one more heave”. Yes, it’s a reflection of the electorate he faces but even so, it suggests (as many of his other actions have) that he’s a follower not a leader.

His main shifts have been on pushing for free movement to enable a return to the single market and abandoning scrapping private schools and pledging to fight anti Semitism.

Other than that his agenda largely matches Corbyn's

Back to normal, and disagreeing. At least I think I am.
Not a lot wrong with much of Corbyn's agenda; look at the way Boris is adopting it. In part, at any rate.

The problem with Corbynism was the chap himself. Student (ish) lefty who never really grew up. AIUI he's a good constituency MP, and when he's out of the leadership he'll go back to being that.

kinabalu

Philip_Thompson said:

I'd rather see Trump out but what do I know?

In this case you are a progressive of almost angelic qualities who has his head screwed on and is on the right side of history.

Malmesbury

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

alex_ said:

I would say that “rich” is a definition of how much money you have, not how much money you earn. If you want to “tax the rich” you have to think about wealth/asset taxes not payroll taxes.

I'd say it's both. But, yes, with the emphasis more on wealth. Bird in the hand etc.

With rising house prices etc there are also a lot of people who are more asset rich than income rich. Indeed a rise in inheritance tax would likely hit more voters than a increase income tax for those earning more than £80,000 a year

The problem with inheritance taxes on homes, is that you have a situation where people are inheriting 4 bed semis they literally cannot afford to buy. In the area I live in, we have a mix of residents. Just going by the cars, you can see the incomers who have paid the full recent price.

A major result of a heavy tax on inheritance would be that every house would have an Overfinch on the driveway.

HYUFD

Fishing said:

Casino_Royale said:

eek said:

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Labour will always have the solution tax the rich more. The way to answer it is to ask them how they propose to do so without those people moving abroad.

Just no fresh thinking, though, is there?

Keeping Labour's "soak the rich" domestic socialist approach, whilst dropping Corbyn's foreign policy baggage, won't be enough to win over floating Tory voters and win an election.

This is a fantastic article from the Wall Street Journal in 1975 which shows where that thinking leads:

http://www.newlearner.com/courses/hts/cia4u/ecoho82.htm

"Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".

(Although the next sentence, "Since we're following down the same road, perhaps we'll meet again", is rarely quoted).

And if Sanders won the nomination and won the election it would be the US ironically leading the way to socialism

BluestBlue

Casino_Royale said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1223886361272487937?s=20

Oh dear, is free broadband coming next.

Starmer is just another empty suit armed with slogans. I had much higher hopes.

What a Lefty moron.

Yep, he's a fucking idiot. Corbyn with a visible jaw.

He's going to double down on a far-left economic and cultural stance, and thinks the electorate will be too stupid to notice.

We'll just have to keep landsliding * these tools until they get the message...


*An Americanism, but one I'm very happy to import!

DecrepiterJohnL

DavidL said:

glw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

C'mon Bernie! - 'President Sanders' would counter all the defeats and disappointments for the Left in recent times many times over. It would be HUGE.

I'd rather see Trump out but what do I know?

The only thing Democrats should be thinking about is beating Trump, all the arguments about candidates and policies are secondary to that, because anyone is better than Trump.

Whilst this is true the choices are bordering on rank.

Bernie Sanders, not even a Democrat, very likely to put off independents and moderates, probably lose badly.

Joe Biden, bordering on gaga and he wasn't the sharpest tool in the box to start with. Would lose badly.

Elizabeth Warren. Has a slight folksy charm but the Pocahontas jibe was just the beginning. Would lose badly.

Pete Buttigieg. Inexperienced, mixed record as a Mayor of a smallish town, would lose badly.

Bloomberg. Probably more of a threat to Trump than most but has absolutely no chance in a party willing to think about Sanders for more than a nanosecond.

Klobuchar. Again a folksy charm but seems incredibly ineffectual and a long way from being ready for such a job. Would lose badly.

So what do they do? Swallow their reservations and choose Bloomberg to get rid of a dangerous maniac or indulge their fantasies in the belief that the majority can be swung around to their way of thinking? I think the answer to that is found in the choices Labour made post 2017.

Bloomberg is also vulnerable to the "not a Dem" charge and wants to increase taxes on the rich which (elsewhere on this thread) is apparently fatal. None of the candidates is compelling.