politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So far the Kamala Harris announcement hasn’t impacted on the W

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So far the Kamala Harris announcement hasn’t impacted on the WH2020 betting

So far there has been very little polling carried out after yesterday’s big announcement that Kamala Harris will be the nominee for VP. In the betting markets the news, which has been widely covered in the US, has hardly moved Biden is seen as about a 60% chance.

Read the full story here

MattW

First

For the second time this week.

Pagan2

second for the first time this week

SeaShantyIrish2

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

Ave_it

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

Pagan2

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

You could perhaps give a clue what you are referring to?

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/status/1293990385765830658

Pagan2

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

eristdoof

Foxy said:

eristdoof said:

Foxy said:

another_richard said:

Foxy said:

Black_Rook said:

Northern_Al said:

MaxPB said:

rural_voter said:

rottenborough said:

MaxPB said:

I still find it incredible that the England death rate is down to under 10 per day by death date, if this information had been revealed sooner how much more economically confident would individuals and businesses feel? I think the PHE has cost us 2-3% of the recovery and necessitated schemes like eat out to help out, it was such a bad decision not to have an end date of the virus and their protests and trying to force a 60 day measure was awful. Glad that the DoH has stood firm and insisted on the internationally comparable measure rather than something cooked up to make everyone stay home to "protect the NHS".

" “The ideology of zero risk is dangerous,” says Yonathan Freund, a Sorbonne professor and Editor of the European Journal of Emergency Medicine "

Telegraph

The problem is that most of the lay population believes in zero risk. Too many subjects have been affected by this delusion. People no longer use sensible cost-benefit analysis (NICE does, when deciding what NHS procedures to allow).

I don't think so, but the risk of death has been massively overstated for the last 2 to 3 months which has weighed on people's confidence to go out and spend money. As I said, if it was common knowledge that only around 20 people per day were dying of COVID and not 80 as was previously reported people would have been more ready to go out. Not just that the death rate has been stuck at around 50 per day for weeks which is another signal of "this hasn't gone away, we should still stay indoors".

I'm not so sure about this. Most people are not staying indoors - they are out and about. The exception is the old and/or vulnerable who are still being cautious, and have been since mid March. But perhaps the number of deaths would have been sustained at a higher level if this group were not still being cautious.

And there's also a good chance that they'll carry on being this cautious indefinitely. Indeed, quite possibly, permanently.

The longer that some people keep on pretending that it's April, are too afraid to go out anywhere unless forced to grocery shop, and keep on sitting at home and adopting other chronic self-isolator habits like disinfecting and quarantining their parcels until they're convinced any contamination has been removed, the harder they are going to find it ever to return to life as it was previously lived.

Fast forward another year or two and there'll still be a significant cohort of the terrified, shuffling into supermarkets once a week at eight o'clock in the morning wearing masks and gloves, and spending the rest of their lives shut up at home. It will have become such an entrenched habit that they'll no longer be able to help themselves.

Well, you jest, but I am finding a significant minority of patients habituated into what seems to be Covid-19 induced agoraphobia*.

*literally true as means fear of marketplaces.

Can I ask how many have some sort of justification for that change ?

Do they already have health vulnerabilities or do they know people who have died for example ?

Strangely, it seems very poorly correlated with what I would asses as risk, particularly weighed against the conditions that I see them for. More to do with precovid personality traits.

One of our trick-cyclists told me that the national suicide rate is up 25% on last year.

Isn't a trick-cyclist a slang name for an anti-depressant, or do you use the same nickname for those taking it?

Rhyming slang for psychiatrist.

But that must itself be a pun on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricyclic_antidepressant

Ave_it

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Benpointer

Pagan2 said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

You could perhaps give a clue what you are referring to?

Read the thread header

DecrepiterJohnL

As noted on the previous thread, you can still back Biden and Trump at 1.02 to be nominated as their parties' candidates.

Pagan2

Benpointer said:

Pagan2 said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

You could perhaps give a clue what you are referring to?

Read the thread header

Yes my bad I assumed it was a reply to something in the last thread

DecrepiterJohnL

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Pagan2

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

MikeSmithson

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

Fair point

DecrepiterJohnL

OP: As for Trump I like the pic above ... He’s a bald as I am.

I know they are wearing masks but I don't think that is Donald Trump standing next to Joe Biden. I'm not even sure it is a man.

Nigelb

eristdoof said:

Foxy said:

eristdoof said:

Foxy said:

another_richard said:

Foxy said:

Black_Rook said:

Northern_Al said:

MaxPB said:

rural_voter said:

rottenborough said:

MaxPB said:

I still find it incredible that the England death rate is down to under 10 per day by death date, if this information had been revealed sooner how much more economically confident would individuals and businesses feel? I think the PHE has cost us 2-3% of the recovery and necessitated schemes like eat out to help out, it was such a bad decision not to have an end date of the virus and their protests and trying to force a 60 day measure was awful. Glad that the DoH has stood firm and insisted on the internationally comparable measure rather than something cooked up to make everyone stay home to "protect the NHS".

" “The ideology of zero risk is dangerous,” says Yonathan Freund, a Sorbonne professor and Editor of the European Journal of Emergency Medicine "

Telegraph

The problem is that most of the lay population believes in zero risk. Too many subjects have been affected by this delusion. People no longer use sensible cost-benefit analysis (NICE does, when deciding what NHS procedures to allow).

I don't think so, but the risk of death has been massively overstated for the last 2 to 3 months which has weighed on people's confidence to go out and spend money. As I said, if it was common knowledge that only around 20 people per day were dying of COVID and not 80 as was previously reported people would have been more ready to go out. Not just that the death rate has been stuck at around 50 per day for weeks which is another signal of "this hasn't gone away, we should still stay indoors".

I'm not so sure about this. Most people are not staying indoors - they are out and about. The exception is the old and/or vulnerable who are still being cautious, and have been since mid March. But perhaps the number of deaths would have been sustained at a higher level if this group were not still being cautious.

And there's also a good chance that they'll carry on being this cautious indefinitely. Indeed, quite possibly, permanently.

The longer that some people keep on pretending that it's April, are too afraid to go out anywhere unless forced to grocery shop, and keep on sitting at home and adopting other chronic self-isolator habits like disinfecting and quarantining their parcels until they're convinced any contamination has been removed, the harder they are going to find it ever to return to life as it was previously lived.

Fast forward another year or two and there'll still be a significant cohort of the terrified, shuffling into supermarkets once a week at eight o'clock in the morning wearing masks and gloves, and spending the rest of their lives shut up at home. It will have become such an entrenched habit that they'll no longer be able to help themselves.

Well, you jest, but I am finding a significant minority of patients habituated into what seems to be Covid-19 induced agoraphobia*.

*literally true as means fear of marketplaces.

Can I ask how many have some sort of justification for that change ?

Do they already have health vulnerabilities or do they know people who have died for example ?

Strangely, it seems very poorly correlated with what I would asses as risk, particularly weighed against the conditions that I see them for. More to do with precovid personality traits.

One of our trick-cyclists told me that the national suicide rate is up 25% on last year.

Isn't a trick-cyclist a slang name for an anti-depressant, or do you use the same nickname for those taking it?

Rhyming slang for psychiatrist.

But that must itself be a pun on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricyclic_antidepressant

No, I think it goes back to WWII, so predates those by at least a decade.

Nigelb

This Republican reaction was both amusing and telling.

Howard Kurtz: Kamala Harris 'getting walk on water coverage' by media after VP pick
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/511885-howard-kurtz-kamala-harris-getting-walk-on-water-coverage-by-media-after-vp

Benpointer

Nigelb said:

eristdoof said:

Foxy said:

eristdoof said:

Foxy said:

another_richard said:

Foxy said:

Black_Rook said:

Northern_Al said:

MaxPB said:

rural_voter said:

rottenborough said:

MaxPB said:

I still find it incredible that the England death rate is down to under 10 per day by death date, if this information had been revealed sooner how much more economically confident would individuals and businesses feel? I think the PHE has cost us 2-3% of the recovery and necessitated schemes like eat out to help out, it was such a bad decision not to have an end date of the virus and their protests and trying to force a 60 day measure was awful. Glad that the DoH has stood firm and insisted on the internationally comparable measure rather than something cooked up to make everyone stay home to "protect the NHS".

" “The ideology of zero risk is dangerous,” says Yonathan Freund, a Sorbonne professor and Editor of the European Journal of Emergency Medicine "

Telegraph

The problem is that most of the lay population believes in zero risk. Too many subjects have been affected by this delusion. People no longer use sensible cost-benefit analysis (NICE does, when deciding what NHS procedures to allow).

I don't think so, but the risk of death has been massively overstated for the last 2 to 3 months which has weighed on people's confidence to go out and spend money. As I said, if it was common knowledge that only around 20 people per day were dying of COVID and not 80 as was previously reported people would have been more ready to go out. Not just that the death rate has been stuck at around 50 per day for weeks which is another signal of "this hasn't gone away, we should still stay indoors".

I'm not so sure about this. Most people are not staying indoors - they are out and about. The exception is the old and/or vulnerable who are still being cautious, and have been since mid March. But perhaps the number of deaths would have been sustained at a higher level if this group were not still being cautious.

And there's also a good chance that they'll carry on being this cautious indefinitely. Indeed, quite possibly, permanently.

The longer that some people keep on pretending that it's April, are too afraid to go out anywhere unless forced to grocery shop, and keep on sitting at home and adopting other chronic self-isolator habits like disinfecting and quarantining their parcels until they're convinced any contamination has been removed, the harder they are going to find it ever to return to life as it was previously lived.

Fast forward another year or two and there'll still be a significant cohort of the terrified, shuffling into supermarkets once a week at eight o'clock in the morning wearing masks and gloves, and spending the rest of their lives shut up at home. It will have become such an entrenched habit that they'll no longer be able to help themselves.

Well, you jest, but I am finding a significant minority of patients habituated into what seems to be Covid-19 induced agoraphobia*.

*literally true as means fear of marketplaces.

Can I ask how many have some sort of justification for that change ?

Do they already have health vulnerabilities or do they know people who have died for example ?

Strangely, it seems very poorly correlated with what I would asses as risk, particularly weighed against the conditions that I see them for. More to do with precovid personality traits.

One of our trick-cyclists told me that the national suicide rate is up 25% on last year.

Isn't a trick-cyclist a slang name for an anti-depressant, or do you use the same nickname for those taking it?

Rhyming slang for psychiatrist.

But that must itself be a pun on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricyclic_antidepressant

No, I think it goes back to WWII, so predates those by at least a decade.

Cockney rhyming slang, I believe.

Malmesbury

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

I think they were hoping for a less seasoned politician. Harris is pro, through and through. They were hoping for a ultra-lefty and a flake.

Ave_it

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

rottenborough

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

CorrectHorseBattery

I hope Trump loses.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-13/johnson-says-irish-sea-border-over-my-dead-body-as-checks-loom

Does he know what he signed?

Benpointer

Pagan2 said:

Benpointer said:

Pagan2 said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

"without an audience"

Without a LIVE audience, aside from small army of techs & hangers-on.

Haven't seen ratings, but was broadcast live on most if not all networks. Plus views on youtube & etc.

You could perhaps give a clue what you are referring to?

Read the thread header

Yes my bad I assumed it was a reply to something in the last thread

Easily done - apologies, my response was unnecessarily terse.

Trying (unsuccessfully) to multitask.

eristdoof

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

The whole world outside of the US and Russia will go into meltdown.

felix

OT: "As for Trump I like the pic above which was flagged up on the previous thread. He’s a bald as I am."

Wow! That. Is. Real. Bald!!!

dixiedean

No surprise it hasn't moved the betting. I doubt it has moved many, if any, votes.
The safe, dull choice.
As indeed is Biden.

Pagan2

eristdoof said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

The whole world outside of the US and Russia will go into meltdown.

I doubt it, I think personally what the 4 years of Trump has shown is it no longer matters that much who is us president.

Andy_JS

"Alastair Stewart
We’ve failed the class of 2020" (£)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/we-ve-failed-the-class-of-2020

DecrepiterJohnL

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

That is what I meant. Her nomination seems to have caught Trump unawares yet they've had months to devise and test attack lines. With Trump calling Harris "nasty" and @TSE's post about Pizzagate, it must have been the alt-right who were backing Hillary Clinton to get the job.

Peter_the_Punter

dixiedean said:

No surprise it hasn't moved the betting. I doubt it has moved many, if any, votes.
The safe, dull choice.
As indeed is Biden.

He's kind of running down the clock, which I think is a sensible strategy. There must be some danger of a reaction if he is seen to be getting too far ahead in the polls at this stage.

Scott_xP

https://twitter.com/IrvineWelsh/status/1294002316522270723

SeaShantyIrish2

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

SandyRentool

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

Benpointer

Apols for re-posting but this great photo seems to have dropped off the header:



Trump's clearly got the wind up

DavidL

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

Benpointer

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

DecrepiterJohnL

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

I had her in a double with Sir Keith Starmer.

Ave_it

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

CorrectHorseBattery

Exams thing is a typical example of this lot making a mountain out of a molehill.

Got Williamson to go on and insult a lot of students and then got MPs to say the situation was fair when it obviously isn’t and then insisting they won’t do anything.

Benpointer

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Lol! I'd love to understand how wide your definition of the 'hard left' is.

SandyRentool

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

'Pamela Harris is a Democratic politician who was a member of the New York State Assembly representing the 46th Assembly District from 2015 to 2018, covering the neighborhoods of Bath Beach, Bay Ridge, Brighton Beach, Coney Island, Dyker Heights, and Seagate, in Brooklyn, until she resigned under a fraud indictment.'

If it wasn't for the fraud, she could have been a contender!

Ave_it

Benpointer said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Lol! I'd love to understand how wide your definition of the 'hard left' is.

Lots of 'em on here!

Are you one of them? Do you support LAB or Layla?

SeaShantyIrish2

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

Today baseball in United States is dying on its feet. Aside from Latin Caribbean communities, fewer and fewer Americans play, watch or give a crap about baseball. Demographics are NOT favorable, nor are self-inflicted wounds such as stolen World Series AND moronic responses to COVID including whining about salaries, refusal of owners & players to bargain in anything approaching good faith AND lack of basic public health discipline (later in marked contrast to National Basketball Association).

Ave_it

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Exams thing is a typical example of this lot making a mountain out of a molehill.

Got Williamson to go on and insult a lot of students and then got MPs to say the situation was fair when it obviously isn’t and then insisting they won’t do anything.

As usual Keir said how awful it is but did not propose a constructive alternative.

Maybe he will send a letter to Gavin

Wulfrun_Phil

Yes I agree Mike. Kamala Harris was impressive, much more so than I expected.

SeaShantyIrish2

SandyRentool said:

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

'Pamela Harris is a Democratic politician who was a member of the New York State Assembly representing the 46th Assembly District from 2015 to 2018, covering the neighborhoods of Bath Beach, Bay Ridge, Brighton Beach, Coney Island, Dyker Heights, and Seagate, in Brooklyn, until she resigned under a fraud indictment.'

If it wasn't for the fraud, she could have been a contender!

Clearly you do NOT know the horrible truth re: NY state legislature, at least until VERY recently. To put it mildly, the days when either house in Albany was a nursery for future greatness (Theodore Roosevelt, Al Smith, Franklin Roosevelt) are LONG past.

CorrectHorseBattery

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

SeaShantyIrish2

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

I keep making that mistake! Mea culpa to PBers AND the Hon. Kamala!!

MaxPB

Harris is the safe pick, she has enough about her that people will for for the bottom of the ticket in case Biden really does shit the bed in the debates, the campaign will become - vote Biden to get Harris in 4 years (or fewer).

Benpointer

Ave_it said:

Benpointer said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Lol! I'd love to understand how wide your definition of the 'hard left' is.

Lots of 'em on here!

Are you one of them? Do you support LAB or Layla?

Oh I am sure I would qualify in your book but it's not how I would describe myself.

Ave_it

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

You'd better get your leader to send me a hard letter telling me off!

SandyRentool

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

SandyRentool said:

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

'Pamela Harris is a Democratic politician who was a member of the New York State Assembly representing the 46th Assembly District from 2015 to 2018, covering the neighborhoods of Bath Beach, Bay Ridge, Brighton Beach, Coney Island, Dyker Heights, and Seagate, in Brooklyn, until she resigned under a fraud indictment.'

If it wasn't for the fraud, she could have been a contender!

Clearly you do NOT know the horrible truth re: NY state legislature, at least until VERY recently. To put it mildly, the days when either house in Albany was a nursery for future greatness (Theodore Roosevelt, Al Smith, Franklin Roosevelt) are LONG past.

I don't claim insight - I just googled the name!

MaxPB

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

Anabobazina

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

DecrepiterJohnL

New pic in the header?

dixiedean

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

She went to High School in Canada. And in Montreal too.
So a French socialist.

Ave_it

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

I don't really like Trump but Biden is past it.

Is Kanye still running?

dixiedean

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

Today baseball in United States is dying on its feet. Aside from Latin Caribbean communities, fewer and fewer Americans play, watch or give a crap about baseball. Demographics are NOT favorable, nor are self-inflicted wounds such as stolen World Series AND moronic responses to COVID including whining about salaries, refusal of owners & players to bargain in anything approaching good faith AND lack of basic public health discipline (later in marked contrast to National Basketball Association).

And the hypocrisy about drug use.

SandyRentool

Looks like Greece and Turkey are shaping up for a bit of a war.

Benpointer

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

You really need to ask?

Anabobazina

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Benpointer said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re impact of Pamela Harris selection on polling, as noted PT presidential nominee typically gets a polling bump when they announce their choice for Vice President.

For two reasons:

1) guaranteed big-time media coverage; and

2) first presidential-level, public decision.

Some will like the pick, some will not, truth is most don't care all that much BUT virtually every likely voter will hear that a clear, definite choice was made.

PLUS it's a clear signal, esp. to less politically-obsessed (that is sane) part of the population that we are fast approaching presidential-election crunch time.

"Pamela Harris" - who had any money on her, eh?

I had her in a double with Sir Keith Starmer.

Darren Trump and Maxine Pence will make worthy opponents.

Ave_it

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

Although being a nice person I have nothing personally against Kinabalu!

CorrectHorseBattery

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

I'm not attacking his point, I am attacking the completely unnecessary use of Remoaners. We're having an educated discussion and these words just cheapen the point.

Just as I had a go at people doing the same with gammon yesterday.

Anabobazina

@Ave_it such as those well-known ‘hard lefties’ @MaxPB , @Casino_Royale and @Richard_Tyndall ?

Benpointer

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

Nope.

Ave-it reflects a sub-set of working-class England for sure (and a sub-set of middle and upper-class England for that matter) but working-class England is not homogenous and plenty of it would fit in Ave-it's 'hard left' category.

CorrectHorseBattery

I've got nothing against most either, I hope nobody thinks they do. Apart from a very select couple of users who have been particularly rude to me and have never apologised, I have nothing against anyone else. I could hardly when I've been objectionable before.

Gallowgate

“I don’t really like Trump but...” is the new calling card of those who don’t really care about anything other than upsetting “lefties” and “remoaners”.

They would love Trump to win.

Anabobazina

Benpointer said:

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

You really need to ask?

I thought I would anyway.

#trumptons

Anabobazina

Ave_it said:

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

I don't really like Trump but Biden is past it.

Is Kanye still running?

So Trump then?

Anabobazina

dixiedean said:

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

She went to High School in Canada. And in Montreal too.
So a French socialist.

Presumably she is French speaker then? Dangerous.

CorrectHorseBattery

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-53771965

Denial.

Anabobazina

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

I think you might be overegging their role as bellwethers just a teensy bit Max!!

Ave_it

Benpointer said:

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Ave_it said:

DavidL said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

Of which year?

This year plus 4 more years of whinging by the hard left - a bit like remoaners on here!

Mature post. Did you need to call people Remoaners?

Just like the gammon thing yesterday, these terms need to go.

You just look immature.

Ave_it is the anti-Kinablu. If you want to know what working class England is thinking then pay attention in that same way that if you want to know what Guardian readers are thinking you pay attention to what Kinablu is saying.

Nope.

Ave-it reflects a sub-set of working-class England for sure (and a sub-set of middle and upper-class England for that matter) but working-class England is not homogenous and plenty of it would fit in Ave-it's 'hard left' category.

Ave it reflects the broad centre moderate social liberal outlook across Britain.

CorrectHorseBattery

Well if you want to know what a former Corbynite and Labour member thinks, don't ask me

Ave_it

Anabobazina said:

@Ave_it such as those well-known ‘hard lefties’ @MaxPB , @Casino_Royale and @Richard_Tyndall ?

I'm not sure I have suggested that those individuals are 'hard left'.

At least not as far as I can recall!

SeaShantyIrish2

Ave_it said:

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

I don't really like Trump but Biden is past it.

Is Kanye still running?

Yes - as an adjunct to the Trumpsky campaign.

For example, KW's petition signatures to qualify for Wisconsin general election ballot were gathered by Republican operatives.

Who also methinks helped engineer nomination of a lefty woman as Libertarian Party nominee.

Anabobazina

Gallowgate said:

“I don’t really like Trump but...” is the new calling card of those who don’t really care about anything other than upsetting “lefties” and “remoaners”.

They would love Trump to win.

It’s the “the remoaners won’t accept Brexit” tendency - the culture war is more important to them than the policy itself.

Most remoaners (including me) have all but forgotten about bloody Brexit!

SirNorfolkPassmore

On topic, surely it was already priced into the odds that the choice would either be Harris or someone (like Rice) who would be broadly as effective second on the ticket?

Only a surprise choice (either one deemed an inspired game-changer or an act of madness) would have moved the odds.

FWIW, I think Harris is a sensible, fairly safe choice. She is a more than capable public performer; she has a reasonably strong back story to drive turnout among groups who are strongly Democrat leaning without alienating independents; she is unlikely to have skeletons in the closet given she's been a major public figure for years; and she is well qualified to be President should that be required. Lots of ticks in lots of boxes.

Biden could have chosen the likes of Stacy Abrahams or Gretchen Whitmer who are less widely known. People would go "oh, that's interesting" and it might either help him a lot or harm him a lot. But he doesn't need to change the dynamics of the race because he has a not massive but pretty decent lead. And he quite sensibly didn't.

EDIT: Although if he loses narrowly, deciding not to change the dynamics of the race will, with hindsight, be deemed an awful mistake. But hindsight's 20/20. Playing the odds, he's sensible.

houndtang

In a just world this young lady would be considerably better known than Greta Thunberg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPxjW8o7Kls

dixiedean

Anabobazina said:

dixiedean said:

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

She went to High School in Canada. And in Montreal too.
So a French socialist.

Presumably she is French speaker then? Dangerous.

Almost certainly she will have some ability.
She wouldn't have graduated in Quebec without it.

Ave_it

I'm going to a pub tomorrow.

I might have gammon with egg and chips. But obviously not with pineapple.

Alistair

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

Given that he is destroying the postal system that is overwhelmingly going to be used by Dems to vote he is in with a chance.

kinabalu

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

And when he loses. It'll be PARTY TIME.

See you there.

CorrectHorseBattery

houndtang said:

In a just world this young lady would be considerably better known than Greta Thunberg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPxjW8o7Kls

Why can't both be well known?

SeaShantyIrish2

Anabobazina said:

dixiedean said:

SandyRentool said:

rottenborough said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Considering "everyone knew" it would be Kamala Harris, the Trump team seemed oddly unprepared for her nomination.

Martin Kettle reckons it's because they can't think of anything really to throw at her.

They could claim that because her parents come from the Caribbean and India then she probably prefers cricket to baseball.

That will swing a couple of million votes.

She went to High School in Canada. And in Montreal too.
So a French socialist.

Presumably she is French speaker then? Dangerous.

Could be helpful in winning the 2nd CD Maine EV, as she can appeal to Francophone voters in Aristook County in their native tongue.

Ditto with Haitian Americans in Florida, esp. in increasing their turnout.

Also among (older) Cajuns in south Louisiana, but doubt Pelican State is in play this year.

Ave_it

kinabalu said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

And when he loses. It'll be PARTY TIME.

See you there.

I was wondering if you would appear!

Let's see

3 Nov - I'll be here (hopefully)

DecrepiterJohnL

houndtang said:

In a just world this young lady would be considerably better known than Greta Thunberg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPxjW8o7Kls

Some sort of anti-mask activist or is there more to it than that?

Scott_xP

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1294014900990365697

Tim_B

Benpointer said:

Apols for re-posting but this great photo seems to have dropped off the header:



Trump's clearly got the wind up

Reminds me of a song -

As I walk along the Bois de Boulogne
With an independent hair

SeaShantyIrish2

Alistair said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

Given that he is destroying the postal system that is overwhelmingly going to be used by Dems to vote he is in with a chance.

Took more than a few months to build the United States Postal System, and will take more than a few months to destroy it.

In last few weeks, did well enough here in King County, WA to handle over half a million ballots returned by voters via the mail (over 200k were returned via drop boxes).

Delivery WAS slower than pre-COVID with respect to political campaign mail. BUT delivery and return of actual ballots for August 2020 WA State primary was for vast majority of voters both timely and efficient.

CorrectHorseBattery

https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1294015226925506563

SeaShantyIrish2

Tim_B said:

Benpointer said:

Apols for re-posting but this great photo seems to have dropped off the header:



Trump's clearly got the wind up

Reminds me of a song -

As I walk along the Bois de Boulogne
With an independent hair

Was that the White Rabbit? The one made famous by Grace Slick & Jefferson Airplane?

DecrepiterJohnL

Alistair said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

Given that he is destroying the postal system that is overwhelmingly going to be used by Dems to vote he is in with a chance.

If Trump is not careful, it will be his own support he undermines. Senior citizens are more likely to vote Republican and by post.

kinabalu

Pagan2 said:

eristdoof said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

I wouldn't advise betting on my hunches mind I am basing it on I talk to a fair number of american friends over the course of a week and last time I thought based on that trump would win. This time he doesn't seem to have lost any that previously supported him and picked up a couple of pro hilary people. Its not a scientific sample by any means nor even big enough to deduce from statistically

It's ok I don't bother with betting!

But this site will go into meltdown on 3/4 Nov if Trump does win!

The whole world outside of the US and Russia will go into meltdown.

I doubt it, I think personally what the 4 years of Trump has shown is it no longer matters that much who is us president.

Not the most insightful post you've ever done. Trump has been utterly toxic on several levels.

Pagan2

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

I don't care actually because i don't think who is president actually matters anymore. Trump showed the world that they can work around whoever it is

CorrectHorseBattery

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1294015823292575750/photo/1

Telegraph got the young girls it wanted

Anabobazina

DecrepiterJohnL said:

houndtang said:

In a just world this young lady would be considerably better known than Greta Thunberg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPxjW8o7Kls

Some sort of anti-mask activist or is there more to it than that?

She descends into conspiracy theory halfway through but the first half is an interesting skit on risk vs livelihood. She’s a good speaker. I dare say we will see more of her as a lightning rod for the incarcerated youth.

Pagan2

Benpointer said:

Anabobazina said:

Ave_it said:

Pagan2 said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

If I was going to bet on this and its far to troubled a market to bother I would put money on trump. I don't see him losing to biden to be honest

On this we agree!

Who do you and @Pagan2 want to win?

You really need to ask?

I am not pro trump by any means i think the guy is a complete dick. I was anti hilary admittedly but that was personal

MaxPB

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Alistair said:

Ave_it said:

Can Trump still do it?

The 2016-2020 double??

Given that he is destroying the postal system that is overwhelmingly going to be used by Dems to vote he is in with a chance.

If Trump is not careful, it will be his own support he undermines. Senior citizens are more likely to vote Republican and by post.

Let's hope. The way he is attacking voting rights is disgusting. Hopefully Biden manages to sweep 40-45 states with big victories.