politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Kamala Harris remains betting favourite to be the Democratic V

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Kamala Harris remains betting favourite to be the Democratic VP nominee

I have a long history of always losing money betting on who will be the Vice Presidential nomination in an American presidential election. Even for WH2020 I’m in negative territory having had a small wager on Elizabeth Warren before the big moves ahead of Super Tuesday that saw Pete Buttigieg and Amy klobuchar get behind Joe Biden

Read the full story here

Chameleon

First, like Wuhan!

Chameleon

FPT:

kinabalu said:

Chris said:

4000 - of which 800 are vacant:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51714498

We are nearly bottom of the league on beds per capita. I was surprised when I saw the figures. Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will test the NHS to destruction.

Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will overwhelm every single healthcare system on earth. The trick is to try and minimise the peak as much as possible.

geoffw

Sleepy Joe is porch-sitting, picking on a guitar "Woke up this morning ... feeling kinda blue ... gotta get a Veep ... dunno what to do .."

eristdoof

FPT:

rottenborough said:

OllyT said:

HYUFD said:

OllyT said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

eristdoof said:

Of all the appaling things I have heard come from Trump's mouth, this is one of the most disgraceful things I have ever heard from potitician in my lifetime.

“I like the numbers being where they are,” said Trump, who appeared to be explicitly acknowledging his political concerns about the outbreak: “I don’t need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn’t our fault.”
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/06/us-coronavirus-death-toll-washington-state

In other words he doesn't care if people on the ship get ill or die, he doesn't want them being counted as US statistics.

I heard him say that. He disgusts me

They say we get the politicians we deserve and Americans chose Trump.

Likewise he disgusts me., it goes beyond the usual political divides. I'm no fan of Johnson but he is a far more decent human being than Trump will ever be.

Jimmy Carter is probably the most recent human being to hold the office of President in the last 50 years and was also one of the worst presidents.

Trump is a product of fears of globalisation and immigration as much as Brexit was, a symptom not a cause

Sorry would not have bought that excuse for electing Trump four years ago and I certainly don't buy it now. Anyone who votes for Trump in November knows exactly the type of person they are giving power to.

Unfortunately, there is a large mass of Republican voters who are now Trump worshippers, who seem to have been dazzled and captivated by his personality. The elite of GOP, who should know better, except Romney, have allowed this to continue without a peep of protest.

America is in very dangerous waters, and I, for one, will be rooting for Biden and I don't care how old he is.

There are very roughly two types of 2016 Trump voters.
T: what you called Trump Worshippers and
R: Republican voters who think that any Republican would be better as president than any Democrat.
There are probably quite a lot in T that are also in R.

The T group will always vote Trump, even if he orders a drone attack on Paul McCartney, they will still vote for him. But this group is nowhere near big enough to win a Whitehouse election.

He also needs the "in R but not in T" group. It is the voters in this group which have to be persuaded not to support such a selfish, nasty and unchristian "person" and stay at home on polling day.

geoffw

Chameleon said:

FPT:

kinabalu said:

Chris said:

4000 - of which 800 are vacant:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51714498

We are nearly bottom of the league on beds per capita. I was surprised when I saw the figures. Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will test the NHS to destruction.

Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will overwhelm every single healthcare system on earth. The trick is to try and minimise the peak as much as possible.

What we want is platykurtosis... when do we want it?...now!

rottenborough

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Sandpit

So, any idea why Tulsi Gabbard has just become layable (albeit for a high price) for the Dem nomination for President?

It’s messed up my spreadsheet!

rottenborough

Sandpit said:

So, any idea why Tulsi Gabbard has just become layable (albeit for a high price) for the Dem nomination for President?

It’s messed up my spreadsheet!

No. But she has been ruled out of the next debate.

Andy_JS

Updated the NW Europe spreadsheet. Germany has 795 cases and no fatalities. Mortality rate in NW Europe including Germany = 0.17, excluding Germany = 0.31.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GvO77Q1O49d0m4lQdBNdus3H8wdf3s-vLPE8c4cntsI/edit#gid=0

Chameleon

Andy_JS said:

Updated the NW Europe spreadsheet. Germany has 795 cases and no fatalities. Mortality rate in NW Europe including Germany = 0.17, excluding Germany = 0.31.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GvO77Q1O49d0m4lQdBNdus3H8wdf3s-vLPE8c4cntsI/edit#gid=0

How about the CFR? (Total deaths/total closed cases).

HYUFD

Sandpit said:

So, any idea why Tulsi Gabbard has just become layable (albeit for a high price) for the Dem nomination for President?

It’s messed up my spreadsheet!

She even managed to lose American Samoa to Bloomberg (his only win) despite being born there, yet is the only candidate not to have dropped out apart from Biden and Sanders

eristdoof

Also FTP

eristdoof said:

rottenborough said:

Anecdote: a friend of my wife's thinks the the whole virus thing is being totally over-egged by the media. It's just like seasonal flu.


Sound familiar?

Making reference to the Carl T Bergstrom tweet below...

If it is just like seasonal flu, and the world follows the "with protective measures" strategy then everything is OK.

If it is just like seasonal flu, and the world doesn't follow the "with protective measures" strategy then everything is OK.

If it is much worse than seasonal flu, and the world follows the "with protective measures" strategy then we'll cope.

If it much worse than seasonal flu, and the world doesn't follow the "with protective measures" strategy then there will be a global disaster.

Question: which stategy, with/without protective measures, is the most sensible?

TheScreamingEagles

We really should have a thread on the greatest moment in the history of Six Nations history, Joe Marler cupping the balls of Alun Wyn Jones.

rcs1000

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

DavidL

I just don't see what she brings to the ticket. California is rock solid. Biden is very popular with black voters. She was a really wooden speaker and debater.

Biden needs someone popular in a swing state, ideally in the mid west. Klobuchar comes to mind but there are other options.

DavidL

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Chief of Staff I think. Either Biden's chief of staff or his VP is going to be running the country for most of his term. Chief of Staff is probably the safer bet.

TheScreamingEagles

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

eristdoof

geoffw said:

Chameleon said:

FPT:

kinabalu said:

Chris said:

4000 - of which 800 are vacant:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51714498

We are nearly bottom of the league on beds per capita. I was surprised when I saw the figures. Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will test the NHS to destruction.

Anything like the worst case forecast Covid peak will overwhelm every single healthcare system on earth. The trick is to try and minimise the peak as much as possible.

What we want is platykurtosis... when do we want it?...now!

LOL.
But we don't need to focus on the 4th moment. A large second moment will be just as effective.

DavidL

Andy_JS said:

Updated the NW Europe spreadsheet. Germany has 795 cases and no fatalities. Mortality rate in NW Europe including Germany = 0.17, excluding Germany = 0.31.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GvO77Q1O49d0m4lQdBNdus3H8wdf3s-vLPE8c4cntsI/edit#gid=0

Germany is either astonishingly lucky or just recording other causes of death. They should have had somewhere between 8 and 32 deaths by now. Its weird.

rcs1000

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

TheScreamingEagles

Just look at his face

https://twitter.com/nickheathsport/status/1236335562577063938

Chameleon

https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1236337756214788100

DavidL

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Both better bets than the current field. But VP is just too random for my taste.

TheScreamingEagles

Anyone think Joe Biden will say he will only serve one term?

Casino_Royale

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

I can only surmise there are a lot of people on exchange who assume (like Bloomberg) that if it isn't a main runner it must end up otherwise being a Big Name.

The evidence for this is slight.

WhisperingOracle

Backing Biden makes sense in a lot of ways for the Democratic establishment, even if he's a weak candidate or declines. He's a brand established with older voters, who could then be replaced by someone like Buttigieg, newly established in the centre as a younger politician and with younger voters during this campaign, taking over from him from the V-P slot.

The only drawback with this is that it requires BIden to perform well enough, for long enough, to manage any transition from the white house.

Casino_Royale

Just laid England at 1.18 for the rugby.

Only a 4 point lead and Wales not playing too badly.

eristdoof

DavidL said:

Andy_JS said:

Updated the NW Europe spreadsheet. Germany has 795 cases and no fatalities. Mortality rate in NW Europe including Germany = 0.17, excluding Germany = 0.31.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GvO77Q1O49d0m4lQdBNdus3H8wdf3s-vLPE8c4cntsI/edit#gid=0

Germany is either astonishingly lucky or just recording other causes of death. They should have had somewhere between 8 and 32 deaths by now. Its weird.

There are some other possible expanations: the IC units are better at delaying death; the 'Do not resuscitate' wish of ill elderly people may be lower, perhaps high risk patients are got to hospital earlier,...

rottenborough

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

I like Sherrod Brown and its a shame he didn't get further. I'm liking him for Veep. And boy they really need Ohio.

Masto I know nothing of.

TheScreamingEagles

Casino_Royale said:

Just laid England at 1.18 for the rugby.

Only a 4 point lead and Wales not playing too badly.

Unlucky.

not_on_fire

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anyone think Joe Biden will say he will only serve one term?

Anyone think he is going to survive a whole term?

rottenborough

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/offpiste9/status/1236341177521184770

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anyone think Joe Biden will say he will only serve one term?

Anyone think he is going to survive a whole term?

POTUS receives the best healthcare in the world.

TheScreamingEagles

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Constitutional scholars says Obama (or any President who has served two terms) can be Vice President however they cannot succeed the President as per the 25th Amendment, it'll be second on the list, the Speaker of the House.

Casino_Royale

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

Just laid England at 1.18 for the rugby.

Only a 4 point lead and Wales not playing too badly.

Unlucky.

Yeah.

Rugby is unpredictable though. It's not nailed on for England.

not_on_fire

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Maybe. The 22nd Amendment states that no person can be ELECTED to be president more than twice, but a VP who succeeds to the presidency hasn’t been elected...

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anyone think Joe Biden will say he will only serve one term?

Anyone think he is going to survive a whole term?

POTUS receives the best healthcare in the world.

That's why I thought Buttigieg would prefer Chief of Staff. But there must be a significant risk no matter what the level of care.

DecrepiterJohnL

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

A quick Wikipedia check finds Cortez Masto was a prosecutor in a previous life and for other candidates, this has meant getting bogged down in defending past prosecutions. For the conspiracy theorists, Sherrod Brown has a degree in Russian.

I think Beto is in with a shout because Texas would be a huge win for the Dems, but more likely it will be the previously unknown Senator QuickGoogleName from the Great State of Wazoo. (Sorry, I've become obsessed with this "Great State of" since noticing American politicians use it all the time.)

DecrepiterJohnL

not_on_fire said:

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

Too easy! Joe Biden in 2008. But yes, it is rare and I won't be betting on it happening in 2020.

Alistair

Backing England in this match was free money

matthiasfromhamburg

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/offpiste9/status/1236341177521184770

It's going to be a heavily contested field this year.

williamglenn

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1236340869126672391?s=21

Casino_Royale

Alistair said:

Backing England in this match was free money

Hmm. It wasn't.

Wales were looking good the first 20 minutes.

I agree they're not now!

brokenwheel

I can understand the whole succession theory with regards to Biden picking a strong candidate to succeed as president, except that would only make sense if victory was likely in the election. It isn't a certainty so a more conventional "expanding the map" candidate seems more likely.

It's unusual for a VP to be a big name, and especially a failed candidate nominee. More likely to be someone not on the graph above tbh.

HYUFD

not_on_fire said:

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

Joe Biden 2008 ironically, before that John Edwards 2004

Pulpstar

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

@MarqueeMark enjoys posting about how she might sweep the DNC, but I don't think he's entirely serious

Andy_JS

Latest results from California.

Sanders 1,246,498 (33.7%)
Biden 974,877 (26.4%)

https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/returns/president/party/democratic

3.6m votes so far compared to 5.2m in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_California_Democratic_primary#Results

Gabs3

Former British spies have been helping the Trump campaign infiltrate Democratic-aligned groups:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/erik-prince-project-veritas.amp.html

If what is said is true, and it is a highly credible source, people like this Richard Seddon are interfering in the democratic elections of a close British ally through nefarious, possibly illegal, means. Surely, they should be sanctioned by the British government for doing this?

ydoethur

not_on_fire said:

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

I would guess George H Bush in 1980 but I don’t know for sure.

Edit - Edwards was a Democratic contender until March 2004, so I think it would be him.

Gabs3

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Cortez Masto is your tip is she? ; )

not_on_fire

Gabs3 said:

Former British spies have been helping the Trump campaign infiltrate Democratic-aligned groups:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/erik-prince-project-veritas.amp.html

If what is said is true, and it is a highly credible source, people like this Richard Seddon are interfering in the democratic elections of a close British ally through nefarious, possibly illegal, means. Surely, they should be sanctioned by the British government for doing this?

No colliusion!

Pulpstar

Sandpit said:

So, any idea why Tulsi Gabbard has just become layable (albeit for a high price) for the Dem nomination for President?

It’s messed up my spreadsheet!

She's even less likely than Hillary Clinton lol

ydoethur

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

No, because he’s ineligible to be president.

rcs1000

not_on_fire said:

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

2008: Obama with Biden!

In 2016, Clinton chose Kaine, who was not a Presidential candidate, and did nothing for her ticket. And Trump chose Pence, who probably helped him.

In 2012, Romney chose Paul Ryan, who had not run for the nomination.

And in 2008, McCain chose Palin, who also had not run for the nomination.

Gabs3

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just look at his face

https://twitter.com/nickheathsport/status/1236335562577063938

Couldn't that be prosecuted as sexual assault?

rcs1000

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

matthiasfromhamburg

Gabs3 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just look at his face

https://twitter.com/nickheathsport/status/1236335562577063938

Couldn't that be prosecuted as sexual assault?

"If you're famous you can grab them by the..."

Gabs3

not_on_fire said:

Gabs3 said:

Former British spies have been helping the Trump campaign infiltrate Democratic-aligned groups:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/erik-prince-project-veritas.amp.html

If what is said is true, and it is a highly credible source, people like this Richard Seddon are interfering in the democratic elections of a close British ally through nefarious, possibly illegal, means. Surely, they should be sanctioned by the British government for doing this?

No colliusion!

We joke about this but it seems like former British spies are allowed to sell their unique skills to the highest bidder all around the world, often for highly immoral ends and often for highly immoral people? It is despicable how British governments just turn the other way, while it reflects so badly on the country.

ydoethur

DecrepiterJohnL said:

not_on_fire said:

When was the last time a losing primary contender for President was chosen as the Veep?

Too easy! Joe Biden in 2008. But yes, it is rare and I won't be betting on it happening in 2020.

So he did. I thought he had withdrawn before the Iowa caucus, but turns out he withdrew after it.

It seems to be fairly common, therefore, but not by any means a given.

Gardenwalker

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Philip_Thompson

Gabs3 said:

Former British spies have been helping the Trump campaign infiltrate Democratic-aligned groups:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/us/politics/erik-prince-project-veritas.amp.html

If what is said is true, and it is a highly credible source, people like this Richard Seddon are interfering in the democratic elections of a close British ally through nefarious, possibly illegal, means. Surely, they should be sanctioned by the British government for doing this?

If they're private citizens then what business is it of the government?

If any laws are broken that's a matter for the US government surely? And if not then it's nobodies business.

rcs1000

Gabs3 said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Cortez Masto is your tip is she? ; )

@speedy2 brought her to my attention.

But I've watched her on YouTube, and I'd advise other PBers to do the same. She's really articulate.

TheScreamingEagles

Ok Gareth Thomas wins 2020.

TheScreamingEagles

Oh ferfuxsake England.

MarqueeMark

Great try wales.

TheScreamingEagles

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

rcs1000

brokenwheel said:

I can understand the whole succession theory with regards to Biden picking a strong candidate to succeed as president, except that would only make sense if victory was likely in the election. It isn't a certainty so a more conventional "expanding the map" candidate seems more likely.

It's unusual for a VP to be a big name, and especially a failed candidate nominee. More likely to be someone not on the graph above tbh.

I would sell *all* the players above. In particular, I think it is nowhere near a 50% chance that the VP is one of Harris, Abrams and Klobuchar.

MarqueeMark

Pulpstar said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

@MarqueeMark enjoys posting about how she might sweep the DNC, but I don't think he's entirely serious

.....rumbled.......

Casino_Royale

MarqueeMark said:

Great try wales.

I've traded this one like an absolute Muppet.

state_go_away

I see David and Sally Abel back in the news letting the side down again by a bit of whinging about still not been allowed back

Gallowgate

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

ydoethur

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Both better bets than the current field. But VP is just too random for my taste.

I’m not betting on VP either. It’s one person’s choice of who they want to stand beside them, there’s a lot of variables and very imprefect information for most of those betting - and potentially others betting against us with much, much better information to hand.

Andy_JS

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1236311903732994049

MarqueeMark

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

It's no zombie apocalypse, is it?

OllyT

DavidL said:

I just don't see what she brings to the ticket. California is rock solid. Biden is very popular with black voters. She was a really wooden speaker and debater.

Biden needs someone popular in a swing state, ideally in the mid west. Klobuchar comes to mind but there are other options.

If Sherod Brown self-identified as a woman he'd be a shoo-in

PeterC

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Nigelb

PeterC said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Sure.
A Biden ticket would need some experience adding to it.

state_go_away

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

It only seemed two months ago when it was all sexy and exotic , something you could catch on a cruise.Now you can get it in Nottingham it seems so mundane.

matthiasfromhamburg

brokenwheel said:

I can understand the whole succession theory with regards to Biden picking a strong candidate to succeed as president, except that would only make sense if victory was likely in the election. It isn't a certainty so a more conventional "expanding the map" candidate seems more likely.

It's unusual for a VP to be a big name, and especially a failed candidate nominee. More likely to be someone not on the graph above tbh.

Common sense seems to suggest that the 'succession aspect' becomes ever more relevant as the plague progresses. When exactly is the VP nomination due?

Sandpit

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

A quick Wikipedia check finds Cortez Masto was a prosecutor in a previous life and for other candidates, this has meant getting bogged down in defending past prosecutions. For the conspiracy theorists, Sherrod Brown has a degree in Russian.

I think Beto is in with a shout because Texas would be a huge win for the Dems, but more likely it will be the previously unknown Senator QuickGoogleName from the Great State of Wazoo. (Sorry, I've become obsessed with this "Great State of" since noticing American politicians use it all the time.)

There’s a danger that the Dems throw everything at Texas and come up just short, while failing to put resources into more marginal states they have a better chance of taking.

It’s as if they’ve learned nothing from the 2016 experience.

TheScreamingEagles

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

As per The Times.




From the beginning it has been a curious fact of this outbreak that the very young have not been affected in the way that might have been expected.

Disease modellers generally anticipate that epidemics produce a “U-shaped curve”. This means that it is that old and the young — those whose immune systems are weakest — who suffer the most. There are good reasons why parents of newborns are advised to keep relatives with sniffles away.

With the new coronavirus, that has not been the case. The left hand side of the “U”, that should represent elevated risk among the young, is flat - and stays flat until late middle age. One of the most reasonable hypotheses to explain this is that it is not the strength of the immune system but the strength of the body that matters.

Now scientists have collected enough data to not only partially confirm this but also put numbers on it. Among people of all ages the apparent “case fatality rate”, deaths divided by total recorded infections, is just 1.4 per cent — provided, that is, you’re healthy.

If you have another condition though - referred to in medical terms as a “comorbidity” — then those odds worsen markedly. For those with heart disease, the case fatality rate calculated by Chinese authorities is 13.2 per cent. For those with diabetes it is 9.2 per cent. For those with chronic respiratory disease or cancer it is around 8 per cent.

Among retirees, and those looking to protect older family members, it seems likely it is not age that should be a concern, so much as illness.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-age-may-not-be-key-indicator-of-mortality-risk-g37dp6c99

Nigelb

rcs1000 said:

brokenwheel said:

I can understand the whole succession theory with regards to Biden picking a strong candidate to succeed as president, except that would only make sense if victory was likely in the election. It isn't a certainty so a more conventional "expanding the map" candidate seems more likely.

It's unusual for a VP to be a big name, and especially a failed candidate nominee. More likely to be someone not on the graph above tbh.

I would sell *all* the players above. In particular, I think it is nowhere near a 50% chance that the VP is one of Harris, Abrams and Klobuchar.

What about 1000/1 on Harris as President ?

ydoethur

PeterC said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Yes, because he was only elected once. He is therefore ‘constitutionally eligible.’

ydoethur

Nigelb said:

PeterC said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Sure.
A Biden ticket would need some experience adding to it.

Some competence as well...

brokenwheel

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

Diabetes has knock-on complications, including weakening the immune system.

rottenborough

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Cortez Masto is your tip is she? ; )

@speedy2 brought her to my attention.

But I've watched her on YouTube, and I'd advise other PBers to do the same. She's really articulate.

Yes, just had a look. But she's not even on BF's list for betting.

Sandpit

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Hence Hillary Clinton at 40 and Michelle Obama at 75 for the nomination. Despite the fact that neither are running - the latter has said nothing in public during the campaign and has never shown an interest in political office, yet she can be laid for the nomination for way more than your saving account pays.

Pulpstar

rottenborough said:

rcs1000 said:

Gabs3 said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

I'm on Pete for Veep.

Well... it's possible. In some ways it's smart: he's another candidate that it's difficult (unless you're a Bernie Bros) to vote against. But he kind of throws Biden's agedness into sharp relief. And he's a lot more articulate than Biden too.

But it doesn't obviously appeal to any constituency where Biden needs votes.

In fact, I don't particularly fancy *any* of the VP candidates above. Instead I present you with my two:

1. Ohio Senator Sherod Brown. He's to the left of Biden, and a bit of a populist but not too much. He's younger than Biden, but not too much. He's smarter and more articulate, but not too much. He doesn't show up Biden, and he strengthens the ticket. He's also from Ohio, which he carried by seven points in 2018.

2. Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. She's Hispanic, and Biden is weaker with Hispanics than with African Americans. Nevada is also one of the few Democratic states where Trump might hope for an upset. She'd play well in next door Arizona too. She's extremely articulate, and not too young. I think she'd also strengthen the ticket.

Cortez Masto is your tip is she? ; )

@speedy2 brought her to my attention.

But I've watched her on YouTube, and I'd advise other PBers to do the same. She's really articulate.

Yes, just had a look. But she's not even on BF's list for betting.

This is why laying the favourites works though

Sandpit

ydoethur said:

PeterC said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Yes, because he was only elected once. He is therefore ‘constitutionally eligible.’

For anyone who thinks Biden and Sanders are spring chickens, we present the Democrat old enough to be their fathers!

Casino_Royale

Why do I bet on sport?

Chameleon

TSE, another Darwin Award candidate:

https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2020/02/28/greece-coronavirus-holy-communion-priest/

"No risk of coronavirus at Holy Communion, “Christ never had germs,” says Greek priest"

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

As per The Times.




From the beginning it has been a curious fact of this outbreak that the very young have not been affected in the way that might have been expected.

Disease modellers generally anticipate that epidemics produce a “U-shaped curve”. This means that it is that old and the young — those whose immune systems are weakest — who suffer the most. There are good reasons why parents of newborns are advised to keep relatives with sniffles away.

With the new coronavirus, that has not been the case. The left hand side of the “U”, that should represent elevated risk among the young, is flat - and stays flat until late middle age. One of the most reasonable hypotheses to explain this is that it is not the strength of the immune system but the strength of the body that matters.

Now scientists have collected enough data to not only partially confirm this but also put numbers on it. Among people of all ages the apparent “case fatality rate”, deaths divided by total recorded infections, is just 1.4 per cent — provided, that is, you’re healthy.

If you have another condition though - referred to in medical terms as a “comorbidity” — then those odds worsen markedly. For those with heart disease, the case fatality rate calculated by Chinese authorities is 13.2 per cent. For those with diabetes it is 9.2 per cent. For those with chronic respiratory disease or cancer it is around 8 per cent.

Among retirees, and those looking to protect older family members, it seems likely it is not age that should be a concern, so much as illness.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-age-may-not-be-key-indicator-of-mortality-risk-g37dp6c99

The death rate is 15% for over 80s with coronavirus though, so age is still the key concern once you get past a certain point rather than pre existing conditions

northern_monkey

Interesting stats on the new Tory voters in 2019:

https://twitter.com/hzbrandenburg/status/1236265259725455360?s=21

ydoethur

Sandpit said:

ydoethur said:

PeterC said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Mad, I tell 'ya. Mad.

And who are all the Hillary backers? You'd have to be beyond crazy to think she stands any chance of being the VP-pick.

Same people who backed David Miliband as Corbyn's successor?

You can back Obama to be veep at 200.

Is that even constitutionally possible?

Yes it is.

However, in the event that the President were to die, the role would skip the VP and go (I believe) straight to the Speaker of the House. Who could be from a different Party.

Not correct. The VP has to be eligible to be President under the 12th Amendment.

‘But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’

So Obama, Clinton and Bush are all ineligible.

Jimmy Carter would be eligible?

Yes, because he was only elected once. He is therefore ‘constitutionally eligible.’

For anyone who thinks Biden and Sanders are spring chickens, we present the Democrat old enough to be their fathers!

I’ve got the feeling the old boy was given twelve months to live - six years ago.

Tough old geezer as well as one of the nicest humans breathing.

But even a corpse as president would be a great improvement on the current options.

Big_G_NorthWales

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

It can weaken the immune system defences

JohnLilburne

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

Coronavirus is a bit boring now, isn’t it.

Nah, The Times this morning helpfully had a graphic showing 10% of diabetics that caught it have died.

What makes people with diabetes more susceptible?

As per The Times.




From the beginning it has been a curious fact of this outbreak that the very young have not been affected in the way that might have been expected.

Disease modellers generally anticipate that epidemics produce a “U-shaped curve”. This means that it is that old and the young — those whose immune systems are weakest — who suffer the most. There are good reasons why parents of newborns are advised to keep relatives with sniffles away.

With the new coronavirus, that has not been the case. The left hand side of the “U”, that should represent elevated risk among the young, is flat - and stays flat until late middle age. One of the most reasonable hypotheses to explain this is that it is not the strength of the immune system but the strength of the body that matters.

Now scientists have collected enough data to not only partially confirm this but also put numbers on it. Among people of all ages the apparent “case fatality rate”, deaths divided by total recorded infections, is just 1.4 per cent — provided, that is, you’re healthy.

If you have another condition though - referred to in medical terms as a “comorbidity” — then those odds worsen markedly. For those with heart disease, the case fatality rate calculated by Chinese authorities is 13.2 per cent. For those with diabetes it is 9.2 per cent. For those with chronic respiratory disease or cancer it is around 8 per cent.

Among retirees, and those looking to protect older family members, it seems likely it is not age that should be a concern, so much as illness.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-age-may-not-be-key-indicator-of-mortality-risk-g37dp6c99

The death rate is 15% for over 80s with coronavirus though, so age is still the key concern once you get past a certain point rather than pre existing conditions

I've been trying to work out if I'm in a high risk group. I'm a 55 year old male and have a heart murmur. The NHS calls me "cardiac risk" and gives me a free flu jab, and bans me from giving blood. However I'm fit and healthy, have a BMI of 21 and a runner - not fast, but I can run a marathon.

HYUFD

northern_monkey said:

Interesting stats on the new Tory voters in 2019:

https://twitter.com/hzbrandenburg/status/1236265259725455360?s=21

Indeed, that equates to just over 8% ie the difference between the 36% Cameron got in 2010 and 2015 pre EU referendum and the 44% Boris got in 2019 to get Brexit done