Can anyone give (or link to) a non-libellous non-contempt-of-court summary of what's happening in Scottish politics? I know about the Salmond case, but have only vaguely heard some umours about Sturgeon, and there seems to be some factional rivalry in the SNP too. What's up?
There have been rumours for some time that Nicola was looking for an international exit but not finding one. The SNP are split between those that want a referendum right now and those who want to do things properly with Westminster consent. The latter also recognise that right now might not be the best time and want a better indication than the polls are giving that a second referendum might pass.
Nicola leads the second group but Boris's blunt responses are making her look weak. When you add in the speculation about the possible fall out of the trial possible leadership candidates are desperate to get into Holyrood. This is likely to result in a serious competition for Ruth's seat between Robertson (the wait candidate) and Cherry (a let's go candidate). Of course there may not be a vacancy. There is no reason why Ruth should stand down unless she not only went the House of Lords but also took a government post. That's possible but far from certain.
A further frisson has been added to all this by the departure of Derek Mackay. He was the obvious heir apparent and would have been very hard to stop if a vacancy had occurred. His departure leaves no obvious or strong candidate in the Parliament. It has stepped up the urgency for both wings.
David, Mackay was always a lightweight, how he ever got to where he was is a mystery. He was never ever going to be leader in a month of Sundays for many reasons including serious lack of talent and charisma. PS: Robertson is the next leader as long as he does not just show himself as a clone of Sturgeon. He has far more talent but people are getting fed up and beginning to think current leadership are getting fat and happy with the current status quo.
Maybe they should do their day job which they are failing at rather than internal fighting over power bases
The next month looks like a shambles for the SNP and will Nicola survive
G, on almost every measure Scotland under the SNP is doing better than England despite all the obstacles flung at them, all this unionist crap about doing their day job is a real joke given the state of the UK and Boris in hiding.
Not backed up on our Scots social media where there is considerable dismay with the SNP. You are blinkered Malc
They really are buggering it up aren't they? The iron party discipline is disintegrating. Eek.
Yes they are really struggling , 48 out of 59 MP's, polls showing over 50% support for upcoming Holyrood elections and another landslide , and they are doing it deliberately.
Is Angus trying to get back as an MSP to give the SNP options when they need to replace Sturgeon.
Otherwise this makes little sense...
Yes. It's a race back to Edinburgh to be in place when the fall happens. It sort of reminds me of those Nazgols in Lord of the Rings racing back to Mount Doom when they realise Frodo has dropped the ring in the volcano.
Cherry would be a good leader in my opinion.
I actually think so too. It's not a big thing comparatively, but Angus Robertson was one of the worst troughers in the expenses scandal.
I'm not the first to say this, but why does the market still have Sanders as almost evens?
Because they can’t quite believe the Dems would be so fucking stupid as to pick a 79 year old Socialist with a heart condition who isn’t even a Dem to go up against a nutcase like Trump that they really, really need to beat?
Indeed, hence the market that’s 11% under-round. Sanders should be at least a 65% chance rather than 52%.
Oh, and the rest of us at having the serious risk of four more years of this psychotic in the White House.
Has US politics ever been in a worse state
It’s no worse than the UK!
That is plainly absurd
Johnson = Trump Labour = Sanders So not absurd unless one is a fawning disciple of Johnson.
Bitter remainers trying to paint Boris as Trump is all they have left
It’s nothing to do with remain or leave it’s taking a cold detached look at the individuals involved who share many character traits and political tactics.
Of course it is. If Boris was an ardent fan of the EU you would be singing his praises
I'm not the first to say this, but why does the market still have Sanders as almost evens?
Because they can’t quite believe the Dems would be so fucking stupid as to pick a 79 year old Socialist with a heart condition who isn’t even a Dem to go up against a nutcase like Trump that they really, really need to beat?
Indeed, hence the market that’s 11% under-round. Sanders should be at least a 65% chance rather than 52%.
Bitter remainers trying to paint Boris as Trump is all they have left
Well you know I'm not a bitter Remainer so let me give you my take -
Trump is a borderline moron and is wholly malevolent in spirit. Johnson is neither of those things. There is simply no comparison.
But a big thing they do have in common is being in politics purely for their own gratification - i.e. an absence of integrity or sense of public service.
And Johnson is certainly lifting some techniques from the Trump playbook.
One thing the new CoTE should do is cut NI contributions - would give all working Scots an income tax cut and offset some of the recent grabs on income introduced by the SNP.
I'm not the first to say this, but why does the market still have Sanders as almost evens?
Because they can’t quite believe the Dems would be so fucking stupid as to pick a 79 year old Socialist with a heart condition who isn’t even a Dem to go up against a nutcase like Trump that they really, really need to beat?
Indeed, hence the market that’s 11% under-round. Sanders should be at least a 65% chance rather than 52%.
Oh, and the rest of us at having the serious risk of four more years of this psychotic in the White House.
Many thanks for your concern. I am as red on Sanders as a very red thing.
Looks like I am going to take a beating. Just can't believe Dems are this stupid.
I am beginning to wonder whether USA is having a massive collective breakdown.
Would Sanders be a good president? If not, which Dem candidate would be better?
Personally, I would say he would obviously be better than Trump, and probably better than most of the previous presidents. Which suggests that if they are having a breakdown it's been going on for quite some time.
The question isn't 'would Sanders be a good President?' It is can he win against Trump? The answer is a resounding NO.
In Seattle, she addressed a crowd of around 7,000. A supporter asked her who she’d choose as a running mate if she were nominated.
“I would be presumptuous at this moment to talk about it, but what I can do is describe,” she said. “That is, I want to partner in this fight. That’s it.”
I know she was being asked who she'd like as her Number 2. But her response suggests she might be up for being VP herself. That would double down on the "change" message. But I think Sanders might be better off with Klobouchar, giving mid-West, moderate and gender balance.
Dems cannot afford to choose a VP who is a Senator from a purple state like Minnesota.
I wouldn't masquerade as a regular Boris supporter, but in fairness he's perfectly capable of mastering a complex brief if he wants to. He rang me out of the blue (in my day job capacity) when he was preparing to stand for the leadership to ask for a briefing on live exports, as he was going to write a Telegraph piece on the issue. We talked for about 15 minutes on the detail and it all appeared a couple of days later, entirely accurately summarised.
The difference from Mrs T is perhaps that she positively liked absorbing lots of detail about everything, whereas he is, I think, somewhat more selective.
That’s a nice anecdote, Nick.
It says a lot about you, that you’re able to talk positively about interactions with Conservative MPs and ministers that you’ve encountered as a result of your day job. #toriesfornickpalmer
Ooh, an SNP civil war over a marginal seat selection.
This is going to be like like watching the feminists and the trans activists having a discussion over Labour Party policy - something best done from as far away as possible!
It is called competition , where do you get "civil war" from. Luckily the SNP have so much talent it is unlike the Westminster parties in not having to put up any old donkey or lickspittle chum they can drag of the streets.
Which candidate do you favour Malc?
unless Alex could make a comeback which is highly unlikely. .
Convicts will now have the vote in Scotland malc - next step is to allow them to stand for office..
Innocent until proven Guilty Harry, I know unionists can stitch up many things but this will be too public even for their tricks.
Six Nations: backed Ireland to beat England at 3.4.
If that transpires, the RFU need to rethink Eddie Jones. The French Defence Coach has also been a successful Head Coach in his own right.
Shaun Edwards was the difference between Wales and France yesterday.
Edwards is why I backed France for the championship, in 2008 Edwards and Gatland transformed a shambolic shit show of a Welsh team into Grandslam winner in a matter of weeks.
France have all the raw materials but a decade of disaster at the coaching level. Getting Edwards in there for 4 and a half years is the best move they could have possibly made. I am furious that the SRU didn't get him and instead got Steve fucking Tandy.
I wouldn't masquerade as a regular Boris supporter, but in fairness he's perfectly capable of mastering a complex brief if he wants to. He rang me out of the blue (in my day job capacity) when he was preparing to stand for the leadership to ask for a briefing on live exports, as he was going to write a Telegraph piece on the issue. We talked for about 15 minutes on the detail and it all appeared a couple of days later, entirely accurately summarised.
The difference from Mrs T is perhaps that she positively liked absorbing lots of detail about everything, whereas he is, I think, somewhat more selective.
That’s a nice anecdote, Nick.
It says a lot about you, that you’re able to talk positively about interactions with Conservative MPs and ministers that you’ve encountered as a result of your day job. #toriesfornickpalmer
Can anyone give (or link to) a non-libellous non-contempt-of-court summary of what's happening in Scottish politics? I know about the Salmond case, but have only vaguely heard some umours about Sturgeon, and there seems to be some factional rivalry in the SNP too. What's up?
There have been rumours for some time that Nicola was looking for an international exit but not finding one. The SNP are split between those that want a referendum right now and those who want to do things properly with Westminster consent. The latter also recognise that right now might not be the best time and want a better indication than the polls are giving that a second referendum might pass.
Nicola leads the second group but Boris's blunt responses are making her look weak. When you add in the speculation about the possible fall out of the trial possible leadership candidates are desperate to get into Holyrood. This is likely to result in a serious competition for Ruth's SNIP
David, Mackay was always a lightweight, how he ever got to where he was is a mystery. He was never ever going to be leader in a month of Sundays for many reasons including serious lack of talent and charisma. PS: Robertson is the next leader as long as he does not just show himself as a clone of Sturgeon. He has far more talent but people are getting fed up and beginning to think current leadership are getting fat and happy with the current status quo.
Maybe they should do their day job which they are failing at rather than internal fighting over power bases
The next month looks like a shambles for the SNP and will Nicola survive
G, on almost every measure Scotland under the SNP is doing better than England despite all the obstacles flung at them, all this unionist crap about doing their day job is a real joke given the state of the UK and Boris in hiding.
Not backed up on our Scots social media where there is considerable dismay with the SNP. You are blinkered Malc
You must be looking at only unionist social media G, reality of the situation with them getting more and more popular at every election shows you are mistaken.
They really are buggering it up aren't they? The iron party discipline is disintegrating. Eek.
Yes they are really struggling , 48 out of 59 MP's, polls showing over 50% support for upcoming Holyrood elections and another landslide , and they are doing it deliberately.
Is Angus trying to get back as an MSP to give the SNP options when they need to replace Sturgeon.
Otherwise this makes little sense...
Yes. It's a race back to Edinburgh to be in place when the fall happens. It sort of reminds me of those Nazgols in Lord of the Rings racing back to Mount Doom when they realise Frodo has dropped the ring in the volcano.
Cherry would be a good leader in my opinion.
I actually think so too. It's not a big thing comparatively, but Angus Robertson was one of the worst troughers in the expenses scandal.
you got numbers for that, he did live as far away as you could get so you would expect him to be among the highest cost MP's.
Six Nations: backed Ireland to beat England at 3.4.
If that transpires, the RFU need to rethink Eddie Jones. The French Defence Coach has also been a successful Head Coach in his own right.
Shaun Edwards was the difference between Wales and France yesterday.
Edwards is why I backed France for the championship, in 2008 Edwards and Gatland transformed a shambolic shit show of a Welsh team into Grandslam winner in a matter of weeks.
France have all the raw materials but a decade of disaster at the coaching level. Getting Edwards in there for 4 and a half years is the best move they could have possibly made. I am furious that the SRU didn't get him and instead got Steve fucking Tandy.
Pivac, Jones and Townsend are all overrated. Edwards is underrated, success at Wasps suggests he has what it takes to be an International Head Coach.
Personally I think Edwards carried Warren for 12 years.
One thing the new CoTE should do is cut NI contributions - would give all working Scots an income tax cut and offset some of the recent grabs on income introduced by the SNP.
NI is not devolved.
Would that be the proven fact , forced out of Tories in Westminster , that 56% of Scottish people pay less tax than their English counterparts and if you count the additional free services it becomes 100%. Greedy selfish Unionists do not like helping the majority of people , seem to prefer the few percent at the top, very progressive.
In Seattle, she addressed a crowd of around 7,000. A supporter asked her who she’d choose as a running mate if she were nominated.
“I would be presumptuous at this moment to talk about it, but what I can do is describe,” she said. “That is, I want to partner in this fight. That’s it.”
I know she was being asked who she'd like as her Number 2. But her response suggests she might be up for being VP herself. That would double down on the "change" message. But I think Sanders might be better off with Klobouchar, giving mid-West, moderate and gender balance.
Dems cannot afford to choose a VP who is a Senator from a purple state like Minnesota.
she won 60% vs 36% in 2018. At the same time the dems won the special election to replace Franken 53-42, so should be ok especially in the circumstances of dems having won the presidency.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I'm not the first to say this, but why does the market still have Sanders as almost evens?
Because they can’t quite believe the Dems would be so fucking stupid as to pick a 79 year old Socialist with a heart condition who isn’t even a Dem to go up against a nutcase like Trump that they really, really need to beat?
Indeed, hence the market that’s 11% under-round. Sanders should be at least a 65% chance rather than 52%.
Oh, and the rest of us at having the serious risk of four more years of this psychotic in the White House.
Many thanks for your concern. I am as red on Sanders as a very red thing.
Looks like I am going to take a beating. Just can't believe Dems are this stupid.
I am beginning to wonder whether USA is having a massive collective breakdown.
Would Sanders be a good president? If not, which Dem candidate would be better?
Personally, I would say he would obviously be better than Trump, and probably better than most of the previous presidents. Which suggests that if they are having a breakdown it's been going on for quite some time.
The question isn't 'would Sanders be a good President?' It is can he win against Trump? The answer is a resounding NO.
Well that is a different question, and it isn't obvious to everyone that Sanders would have a worse chance against Trump than any of the other candidates. But it's not the only question anyone is allowed to ask. What's your answer?
And voting for the person you think would make the best president doesn't seem to be especially stupid or a sign of a breakdown, especially when second-guessing who would likely do better or worse in the general election doesn't always work out that well - weren't there reports in 2016 of some Democrat supporters voting Trump in Republican primaries because he would so obviously lose in a landslide in the General? And plenty of people arguing that Clinton was obviously more electable - which seems implausible looking at what happened.
I wouldn't masquerade as a regular Boris supporter, but in fairness he's perfectly capable of mastering a complex brief if he wants to. He rang me out of the blue (in my day job capacity) when he was preparing to stand for the leadership to ask for a briefing on live exports, as he was going to write a Telegraph piece on the issue. We talked for about 15 minutes on the detail and it all appeared a couple of days later, entirely accurately summarised.
The difference from Mrs T is perhaps that she positively liked absorbing lots of detail about everything, whereas he is, I think, somewhat more selective.
That’s a nice anecdote, Nick.
It says a lot about you, that you’re able to talk positively about interactions with Conservative MPs and ministers that you’ve encountered as a result of your day job. #toriesfornickpalmer
Interesting on several levels:
- Nick is the go-to guy on animal welfare, across the political divide. Kudos.
- Boris sufficiently non-partisan to seek out that advice. And hopefully, to implement it.
- Boris absorbed the briefing and "got it". Kinda gives the lie to the "too lazy to be arsed" line.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
Well that second fight lived up to expectations, Tyson Fury was just phenomenal. If I was Wilder I wouldn't be asking for a rematch, as going to get duffed up again.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I'm not the first to say this, but why does the market still have Sanders as almost evens?
Because they can’t quite believe the Dems would be so fucking stupid as to pick a 79 year old Socialist with a heart condition who isn’t even a Dem to go up against a nutcase like Trump that they really, really need to beat?
Indeed, hence the market that’s 11% under-round. Sanders should be at least a 65% chance rather than 52%.
Oh, and the rest of us at having the serious risk of four more years of this psychotic in the White House.
Many thanks for your concern. I am as red on Sanders as a very red thing.
Looks like I am going to take a beating. Just can't believe Dems are this stupid.
I am beginning to wonder whether USA is having a massive collective breakdown.
Would Sanders be a good president? If not, which Dem candidate would be better?
Personally, I would say he would obviously be better than Trump, and probably better than most of the previous presidents. Which suggests that if they are having a breakdown it's been going on for quite some time.
The question isn't 'would Sanders be a good President?' It is can he win against Trump? The answer is a resounding NO.
Well that is a different question, and it isn't obvious to everyone that Sanders would have a worse chance against Trump than any of the other candidates. But it's not the only question anyone is allowed to ask. What's your answer?
And voting for the person you think would make the best president doesn't seem to be especially stupid or a sign of a breakdown, especially when second-guessing who would likely do better or worse in the general election doesn't always work out that well - weren't there reports in 2016 of some Democrat supporters voting Trump in Republican primaries because he would so obviously lose in a landslide in the General? And plenty of people arguing that Clinton was obviously more electable - which seems implausible looking at what happened.
You are free to ask whatever questions you like.
My point, as a spectator is worrying about whether Sanders would be a good or bad President is irrelevant if he can't win against Trump.it is a perfectly legitimate question for anyone with a vote.
You are quite right about the rest of the field more likely than not struggling against Trump. It is just the USA is not ready for anyone who can be labelled 'socialist'.
It says a lot about you, that you’re able to talk positively about interactions with Conservative MPs and ministers that you’ve encountered as a result of your day job. #toriesfornickpalmer
It must have been so tempting just to stick a little pisstake detail in there
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I think Bloomberg as an independent would take more off Trump than Sanders.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I think Bloomberg as an independent would take more off Trump than Sanders.
Bloomberg is the one with the data that confirms it either way. You are free to laugh at me in a few weeks. But I have to wonder about Bloomberg’s strategy of ceasefire for the first few contests and then all guns blazing for Super Tuesday. This is exactly what I’d do if I were setting out as a third party candidate from the off but wanted to build momentum and ground game during the primaries.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I suspect Bloomberg would balk at the notion of a Sanders Presidency, which is probably one of the reasons why he entered the race. Bloomberg's detestation of Trump can't be underestimated either.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I think Bloomberg as an independent would take more off Trump than Sanders.
Can anyone give (or link to) a non-libellous non-contempt-of-court summary of what's happening in Scottish politics? I know about the Salmond case, but have only vaguely heard some umours about Sturgeon, and there seems to be some factional rivalry in the SNP too. What's up?
There have been rumours for some time that Nicola was looking for an international exit but not finding one. The SNP are split between those that want a referendum right now and those who want to do things properly with Westminster consent. The latter also recognise that right now might not be the best time and want a better indication than the polls are giving that a second referendum might pass.
Nicola leads the second group but Boris's blunt responses are making her look weak. When you add in the speculation about the possible fall out of the trial possible leadership candidates are desperate to get into Holyrood. This is likely to result in a serious competition for Ruth's SNIP
David, Mackay was always a lightweight, how he ever got to where he was is a mystery. He was never ever going to be leader in a month of Sundays for many reasons including serious lack of talent and charisma. PS: Robertson is the next leader as long as he does not just show himself as a clone of Sturgeon. He has far more talent but people are getting fed up and beginning to think current leadership are getting fat and happy with the current status quo.
Maybe they should do their day job which they are failing at rather than internal fighting over power bases
The next month looks like a shambles for the SNP and will Nicola survive
G, on almost every measure Scotland under the SNP is doing better than England despite all the obstacles flung at them, all this unionist crap about doing their day job is a real joke given the state of the UK and Boris in hiding.
Not backed up on our Scots social media where there is considerable dismay with the SNP. You are blinkered Malc
You must be looking at only unionist social media G, reality of the situation with them getting more and more popular at every election shows you are mistaken.
Not really. Our Scots social media includes SNP supporters and even they are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
A three-way contest will see votes going all over the place, it could be genuinely unpredictable and a few States going to MB could upset the Electoral College somewhat.
What I think puts Trump in pole position in this scenario, is that the whole Republican Party machine will be squarely behind their man. I'm not sure that the same could be said of the Democrat machine lining up behind Sanders.
Who might Bloomberg’s VP pick be as an indie candidate?
Mitt Romney
Good call!
Remember how during the impeachment Romney came out against Trump and everybody said, whoa, it turns out Romney is a rare example of an honourable politician true to their oath of office regardless of personal advancement? If you don't think that explanation is credible, this would be an alternative one...
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
A three-way contest will see votes going all over the place, it could be genuinely unpredictable and a few States going to MB could upset the Electoral College somewhat.
What I think puts Trump in pole position in this scenario, is that the whole Republican Party machine will be squarely behind their man. I'm not sure that the same could be said of the Democrat machine lining up behind Sanders.
They really are buggering it up aren't they? The iron party discipline is disintegrating. Eek.
Yes they are really struggling , 48 out of 59 MP's, polls showing over 50% support for upcoming Holyrood elections and another landslide , and they are doing it deliberately.
Is Angus trying to get back as an MSP to give the SNP options when they need to replace Sturgeon.
Otherwise this makes little sense...
Yes. It's a race back to Edinburgh to be in place when the fall happens. It sort of reminds me of those Nazgols in Lord of the Rings racing back to Mount Doom when they realise Frodo has dropped the ring in the volcano.
Cherry would be a good leader in my opinion.
I actually think so too. It's not a big thing comparatively, but Angus Robertson was one of the worst troughers in the expenses scandal.
you got numbers for that, he did live as far away as you could get so you would expect him to be among the highest cost MP's.
Who might Bloomberg’s VP pick be as an indie candidate?
Mitt Romney
Good call!
Remember how during the impeachment Romney came out against Trump and everybody said, whoa, it turns out Romney is a rare example of an honourable politician true to their oath of office regardless of personal advancement? If you don't think that explanation is credible, this would be an alternative one...
If Bloomberg were to stand as an Independent (big IF) Romney would be a great pick. Unless the economy tanks between now and November I can only see a Trump second term.
If Coronavirus grinds the Chinese economy to a halt, the fallout could affect the US economy negatively. Then, who knows
Don't really see who would vote Bloomberg over Trump who didn't vote Hillary over Trump.
Lots of people. Hillary was reviled even by quite moderate Republicans.
But largely they are economic liberals. Sure they don't like Trump much, but they're not going to risk Sanders as president. So Bloomberg would only be fishing in a pool as large as Republicans who voted for Hillary in 2016.
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Sanders has always been super strong with young people. The reason he lost to Hilary was that he was incredibly weak with old white voters (i.e. People who vote)
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Theoretically, Betfair is banned in the USA. There’s also a US site called PredictIt that’s banned in the UK.
If you can manage to get an account with both, there’s usually some arb opportunities from understanding the differences in thinking between UK and US- based customers betting on the same market. From memory in 2016, a couple of US-based PBers were rather helpful in identifying these differences and spotting value on Betfair.
Not really. Our Scots social media includes SNP supporters and even they are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland
Don't be shy, pop up a few tweets from these SNP supporters that are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland. Did they coincidentally also used to think that Brexit and BJ were shyte but actually quite like both now?
Does anyone think Bernie could beat Trump in November?
I do. Bernie channels anger. He's no Corbyn who was too much the gentleman and not prepared to get personal. Bernie is a first name person. Bernie is head of an enormous multi-racial, all ages family that rivals Trump's. He is best placed to beat Trump. Democrat activists seem to agree with me.
Does anyone think Bernie could beat Trump in November?
For sure. I will be surprised and bitterly disappointed if he doesn't.
I am a blank page on US politics and want Trump gone but reading this forum of very knowledgeable posters the consensus is Saunders has no chance, and even I cannot see the US electing a Corbyn style president to be fair
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I think Bloomberg as an independent would take more off Trump than Sanders.
Bloomberg is the one with the data that confirms it either way. You are free to laugh at me in a few weeks. But I have to wonder about Bloomberg’s strategy of ceasefire for the first few contests and then all guns blazing for Super Tuesday. This is exactly what I’d do if I were setting out as a third party candidate from the off but wanted to build momentum and ground game during the primaries.
Good point, Bloomberg is very much data driven. He has said that he will back the Democratic nominee against Trump, I hope that holds even if it is Sanders.
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Theoretically, Betfair is banned in the USA. There’s also a US site called PredictIt that’s banned in the UK.
If you can manage to get an account with both, there’s usually some arb opportunities from understanding the differences in thinking between UK and US- based customers betting on the same market. From memory in 2016, a couple of US-based PBers were rather helpful in identifying these differences and spotting value on Betfair.
Just like Jeremy Corbyn was preparing for government in December?
No. More like Sinn Fein were feeling upbeat in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
In fact, to be serious for a second, I prefer your position to mine. If you are right and it's a Trump landslide, then you have called it, you're a shrewdy, and (if you're a bettor) will have made money. And if you're very wrong, Trump out, then you will have that glorious event to celebrate along with every person of sound mind and good character on the planet.
Whereas me, I'm exposed every which way - kudoswise, moneywise, and above all politically and emotionally and spiritually. If I'm wrong I lose it all.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
I understand your logic, but no I can't see an outcome other than a Trump second term.
If Bloomberg was a bit more charismatic I guess I might be on to something. I do wonder though how Bloomberg sees a Sanders Presidency relative to a Trump second term. Despite what he says, he might follow your logic and think what the hell, at worst I stop Sanders and at best I sneak it.
I think Bloomberg as an independent would take more off Trump than Sanders.
Bloomberg is the one with the data that confirms it either way. You are free to laugh at me in a few weeks. But I have to wonder about Bloomberg’s strategy of ceasefire for the first few contests and then all guns blazing for Super Tuesday. This is exactly what I’d do if I were setting out as a third party candidate from the off but wanted to build momentum and ground game during the primaries.
Good point, Bloomberg is very much data driven. He has said that he will back the Democratic nominee against Trump, I hope that holds even if it is Sanders.
Anyone stateside (Robert?), would be interested to know proportion of Bloomberg ads that are already anti Trump rather than more primary focused.
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Theoretically, Betfair is banned in the USA. There’s also a US site called PredictIt that’s banned in the UK.
If you can manage to get an account with both, there’s usually some arb opportunities from understanding the differences in thinking between UK and US- based customers betting on the same market. From memory in 2016, a couple of US-based PBers were rather helpful in identifying these differences and spotting value on Betfair.
Thanks. I spot an opportunity.
Online gambling in the US is less regulated now than it used to be. There’s a few “sports book” websites that have popped up in recent years, but wouldn’t dare suggest which are the legit ones. I guess the legit ones actually validate that the billing address of your card matches with the bank.
Not really. Our Scots social media includes SNP supporters and even they are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland
Don't be shy, pop up a few tweets from these SNP supporters that are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland. Did they coincidentally also used to think that Brexit and BJ were shyte but actually quite like both now?
So Scotland under the SNP is an utopia beyond reproach even by some of the governments supporters
Unfortunately for one and all, I have to wrench myself off the thread to go outside for a prolonged period. But on that question of great British boxing performances to compare with last night, can I suggest one. Feel free to poo poo with your much better cred on this topic but here we go, what's the harm -
Munich 72. Minter v Hamani. The bout which secured for "Boom Boom" an Olympic bronze.
Not really. Our Scots social media includes SNP supporters and even they are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland
Don't be shy, pop up a few tweets from these SNP supporters that are expressing concern at the neglect of the domestic agenda in Scotland. Did they coincidentally also used to think that Brexit and BJ were shyte but actually quite like both now?
So Scotland under the SNP is an utopia beyond reproach even by some of the governments supporters
I didn't say that, I asked for some examples of the 'concerned' SNP supporters that you claim exist. I assume by your retreat into strawman-ism that they will not be forthcoming.
I am a blank page on US politics and want Trump gone but reading this forum of very knowledgeable posters the consensus is Saunders has no chance, and even I cannot see the US electing a Corbyn style president to be fair
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
A three-way contest will see votes going all over the place, it could be genuinely unpredictable and a few States going to MB could upset the Electoral College somewhat.
What I think puts Trump in pole position in this scenario, is that the whole Republican Party machine will be squarely behind their man. I'm not sure that the same could be said of the Democrat machine lining up behind Sanders.
Whatever happens, only two candidates will win any electoral college votes. The Republican and the Democrat candidates.
Just like Jeremy Corbyn was preparing for government in December?
No. More like Sinn Fein were feeling upbeat in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
In fact, to be serious for a second, I prefer your position to mine. If you are right and it's a Trump landslide, then you have called it, you're a shrewdy, and (if you're a bettor) will have made money. And if you're very wrong, Trump out, then you will have that glorious event to celebrate along with every person of sound mind and good character on the planet.
Whereas me, I'm exposed every which way - kudoswise, moneywise, and above all politically and emotionally and spiritually. If I'm wrong I lose it all.
If Sanders wins then centrists will have a horrifying truth to face up to: President Trump would never have needed to happen. It would have been them, by supporting Hillary in the primaries last time, who put him in the white house
I am a blank page on US politics and want Trump gone but reading this forum of very knowledgeable posters the consensus is Saunders has no chance, and even I cannot see the US electing a Corbyn style president to be fair
Let's chat on November 4th.
Lets hope between now and then the US comes to its senses
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Sanders has always been super strong with young people. The reason he lost to Hilary was that he was incredibly weak with old white voters (i.e. People who vote)
There will be plenty who turn out for him purely because of Trump. Among them a few Republicans. The US might not be ready for a socialist President (and I think he’d have severe problems with Congress) but they may be just about to get one.
Is the thinking on Mayor Mike that he’s gonna run in the general whether he gets the nomination or otherwise, just for shits and giggles?
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
My assumption is it would be predictable. It would be a Trump landslide.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
That‘s popular wisdom of course. But Bloomberg was a Republican mayor of New York that endorsed George W. And Trump is also no ordinary Republican President. I can envisage quite a lot of Trump to Bloomberg switchers, on top of motivating the 2016 stay at homes to turn out for him.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
A three-way contest will see votes going all over the place, it could be genuinely unpredictable and a few States going to MB could upset the Electoral College somewhat.
What I think puts Trump in pole position in this scenario, is that the whole Republican Party machine will be squarely behind their man. I'm not sure that the same could be said of the Democrat machine lining up behind Sanders.
Whatever happens, only two candidates will win any electoral college votes. The Republican and the Democrat candidates.
The last third party candidate to win electoral college votes was Wallace in 1968.
Not even Ross Perot managed that and Bloomberg is no Ross Perot.
Sceptical Bloomberg would takes votes from Trump in states where it mattered.
Does anyone think Bernie could beat Trump in November?
I do. Bernie channels anger. He's no Corbyn who was too much the gentleman and not prepared to get personal. Bernie is a first name person. Bernie is head of an enormous multi-racial, all ages family that rivals Trump's. He is best placed to beat Trump. Democrat activists seem to agree with me.
Anyone any idea what proportion of the money going onto the US GE on Betfair is from UK punters?
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market. I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
Haven't you lost enough money convincing yourself that backing the candidate you wanted to win was an impartial rational decision?
I'm substantially ahead on my political betting overall.
But you are right to make the point. It is too easy to post rationalise an emotional position. You have to guard against it all the time.
There are other guidelines I think.
Avoid false analogies.
Avoid believing the worst will happen (so you are never disappointed and sometimes pleasantly surprised).
Perhaps someone could come up with a list of guidelines to successful betting?
Numbers 1, 2 and 3: Make sure you distinguish between what you want to happen and what you think will happen. Bet only on the second and not on the first, most betting mistakes come from being insufficiently detached from your personal preference of outcome.
At least, that's my excuse for laying Boris Johnson as next PM for three years, up until about a fortnight before he got elected!
Does anyone think Bernie could beat Trump in November?
I do. Bernie channels anger. He's no Corbyn who was too much the gentleman and not prepared to get personal. Bernie is a first name person. Bernie is head of an enormous multi-racial, all ages family that rivals Trump's. He is best placed to beat Trump. Democrat activists seem to agree with me.
Comments
I was interested. You're a big big fan of the noble art, aren't you?
NI is not devolved.
It says a lot about you, that you’re able to talk positively about interactions with Conservative MPs and ministers that you’ve encountered as a result of your day job.
#toriesfornickpalmer
I’d say under electoral college, Sanders vs Trump vs Bloomberg would not be as predictable as assumed
Shaun Edwards was the difference between Wales and France yesterday.
Even without an Independent Bloomberg, against Bernie we are looking at a massive Trump victory.
France have all the raw materials but a decade of disaster at the coaching level. Getting Edwards in there for 4 and a half years is the best move they could have possibly made. I am furious that the SRU didn't get him and instead got Steve fucking Tandy.
Personally I think Edwards carried Warren for 12 years.
Greedy selfish Unionists do not like helping the majority of people , seem to prefer the few percent at the top, very progressive.
And given Sanders is also no ordinary Democrat, there would no doubt be potentially as many Democrat to Bloomberg switchers also, especially given he has most recently called himself a Democrat.
Lastly Bloomberg would be no ordinary third party candidate, with both an established political record and a financial war chest that could outspend both parties out together.
Let’s face it, none of these three have any party name tattooed to their political heart, which is what I think would make a threeway so interesting.
And voting for the person you think would make the best president doesn't seem to be especially stupid or a sign of a breakdown, especially when second-guessing who would likely do better or worse in the general election doesn't always work out that well - weren't there reports in 2016 of some Democrat supporters voting Trump in Republican primaries because he would so obviously lose in a landslide in the General? And plenty of people arguing that Clinton was obviously more electable - which seems implausible looking at what happened.
- Nick is the go-to guy on animal welfare, across the political divide. Kudos.
- Boris sufficiently non-partisan to seek out that advice. And hopefully, to implement it.
- Boris absorbed the briefing and "got it". Kinda gives the lie to the "too lazy to be arsed" line.
https://www.khaleejtimes.com/coronavirus-outbreak/COVID-19-Iran-says-in-total-43-infected-with-coronavirus-8-dead-
This is sub-optimal.
https://twitter.com/MammothWhale/status/1231527162131501059?s=20
My point, as a spectator is worrying about whether Sanders would be a good or bad President is irrelevant if he can't win against Trump.it is a perfectly legitimate question for anyone with a vote.
You are quite right about the rest of the field more likely than not struggling against Trump. It is just the USA is not ready for anyone who can be labelled 'socialist'.
I have a feeling that the Sanders=Corbyn assumption is distorting the market.
I think Sanders for President is a value bet.
I watched a young Latino in Nevada say "We are family and Bernie is our father".
What I think puts Trump in pole position in this scenario, is that the whole Republican Party machine will be squarely behind their man. I'm not sure that the same could be said of the Democrat machine lining up behind Sanders.
Sanders 34.4%
Biden 17.5%
Buttigieg 15.9%
Warren 13.2%
Klob 9.7%
Steyer 8.9%
Gabbard 0.4%
Final count
Sanders 40.6%
Biden 18.7%
Buttigieg 18.1%
Warren 11.7%
Klob 7.3%
Steyer 3.6%
Gabbard 0.01%
County delegates
Sanders 46.6%
Biden 19.2%
Buttigieg 15.4%
Warren 10.3%
Klobuchar 4.5%
Steyer 3.8%
Gabbard 0.1%
If Coronavirus grinds the Chinese economy to a halt, the fallout could affect the US economy negatively. Then, who knows
If you can manage to get an account with both, there’s usually some arb opportunities from understanding the differences in thinking between UK and US- based customers betting on the same market. From memory in 2016, a couple of US-based PBers were rather helpful in identifying these differences and spotting value on Betfair.
He has said that he will back the Democratic nominee against Trump, I hope that holds even if it is Sanders.
In fact, to be serious for a second, I prefer your position to mine. If you are right and it's a Trump landslide, then you have called it, you're a shrewdy, and (if you're a bettor) will have made money. And if you're very wrong, Trump out, then you will have that glorious event to celebrate along with every person of sound mind and good character on the planet.
Whereas me, I'm exposed every which way - kudoswise, moneywise, and above all politically and emotionally and spiritually. If I'm wrong I lose it all.
Unfortunately for one and all, I have to wrench myself off the thread to go outside for a prolonged period. But on that question of great British boxing performances to compare with last night, can I suggest one. Feel free to poo poo with your much better cred on this topic but here we go, what's the harm -
Munich 72. Minter v Hamani. The bout which secured for "Boom Boom" an Olympic bronze.
But you are right to make the point. It is too easy to post rationalise an emotional position. You have to guard against it all the time.
There are other guidelines I think.
Avoid false analogies.
Avoid believing the worst will happen (so you are never disappointed and sometimes pleasantly surprised).
Perhaps someone could come up with a list of guidelines to successful betting?
Sanders 20
Biden 9
Buttigieg 7
Making the nationwide race approximately:
48 Sanders
30 Buttigieg
15 Biden
8 Warren
7 Klobuchar
The US might not be ready for a socialist President (and I think he’d have severe problems with Congress) but they may be just about to get one.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/23/daredevil-dies-during-homemade-rocket-launch-california-mike-hughes
Not even Ross Perot managed that and Bloomberg is no Ross Perot.
Sceptical Bloomberg would takes votes from Trump in states where it mattered.
At least, that's my excuse for laying Boris Johnson as next PM for three years, up until about a fortnight before he got elected!