Today’s polling does seem likely to shift the narrative somewhat.
Most likely, Trump did get a bit of a convention bounce (I am on record saying it was real), but it has proved to be the usual froth.
Interesting how the two polls today showing a big Biden lead are the Guardian and the Economist.
And some of the state polling goes against the national ones - Trump +7% in Georgia, +2 in North Carolina and Biden 3% ahead in PA. Not what you would expect if Biden's lead is widening.
*Biden's lead is definitely narrowing*. But the narrowing is almost entirely the consequence of Trump picking up WNV/DKs. That's a trend that I would expect to see continue through to polling day.
However, unless the polls are not just understating Trump (which is a fair bet), but also over-estimating Biden, then it's still a very tough ask for Trump. Simply, if Biden clears 50% on the day, I simply can't see Trump winning.
According to RCP, it's started widening again.
I would be cautious about treating a single day's polling as a trend. Also, wake me up when Biden leaves the 50.1% +/- 1.1% range on 538.
Like surely, if you think Trump is going to win but you want a bit of insurance Trump +48.5 EC votes @1.68 is a better bet that Trump @2.02?
No - I don`t believe in insurance. Biden is going to win. Full steam ahead.
Yay.
I have bought EC supremacy at 28 for enough to not tell the wife.
Good luck.
I've got a bet with HYUFD that essentially Biden will win by 74 or more electoral college votes. What do you think of that?
I think you will win that bet. But you legged him over with 3/1 odds so you should be upright and offer to void it.
The current round of rioting is a complicating factor, increasing uncertainty of the outcome.
Certainly, Kenosha has enabled Trump to bash on about law and order with his base, and Trump is the only point of enthusiasm in this election.
But that is not a straightforward win for Trump - because for each uptick in enthusiasm he creates in his base, he causes a similar uptick in enthusiasm for voting against him, regardless of Biden being his opponent.
Personally, I expect - the Black vote to return to or even exceed the levels that Obama managed to turn out - the female vote to be extremely high, and more anti-Trump than ever - the Establishment GOP vote to be down or even turn Biden - Trump's core base to turn out big time.
This leads me to expect a big, but not perhaps huge, win for Biden, but with a high degree of uncertainty about that prediction. I think 70-100 EC win is about right.
Why do you think the Black vote is going to return to Obama levels or even exceed? There has been clear signs in the polls that Trump is picking up some support vs 2016. The murder rate has also gone up massively in a lot of the inner cities. Why is that going to make someone Black think "I must vote Biden"?
Re the Establishment GOP, they don't like Trump as much as ever but there is a fair few of them who were disgusted by the treatment of Kavanaugh. I suspect they will hold their noses.
I suspect there will be a lot more like this 2016 Trump voter:
"After losing two friends to COVID-19, Primus wishes the President would be a little more responsible about public health guidelines. (“Put a mask on in public appearances—just put it on!”) And she rolls her eyes at Trump’s penchant for outrageous statements. “Don’t compare this to golf, are you serious?” she says, referring to Trump’s comment that the officer who shot Blake “choked” like a golfer missing a tap-in putt. She shakes her head, as if she were scolding a dog who just can’t stop chewing on shoes.
Still, Primus says she will reluctantly vote for Trump again in November. She believes the Democrats have gone too far left, and opposes what she sees as the “anger” of the anti-Trump movement. “People didn’t like Trump getting elected, and they categorized anybody who voted for him, they called us racist and homophobic,” she says. “I feel like this campaign has been all about not liking Trump.”
Sorry, was not on for a while.
My theory re the Black vote this November is fueled by one of the BLM's reactions to the series of police killings this year - voter registration drives and community organizing to get out the vote. There is a determination to vote and get black representatives involved in government at all levels, not to support one of their own in breaking barriers (Obama), but to get decision-makers in place to start tackling the issues that white politicians of both stripes have failed to do even since the civil rights movement.
If the Black vote is turning out to vote for local and state representatives, they'll be there for the US elections - Pres, Senate and House - too.
I think you might see some of the same effect in the Latino vote, but not so pronounced as the Black vote.
Today’s polling does seem likely to shift the narrative somewhat.
Most likely, Trump did get a bit of a convention bounce (I am on record saying it was real), but it has proved to be the usual froth.
Interesting how the two polls today showing a big Biden lead are the Guardian and the Economist.
And some of the state polling goes against the national ones - Trump +7% in Georgia, +2 in North Carolina and Biden 3% ahead in PA. Not what you would expect if Biden's lead is widening.
Biden's lead is definitely narrowing. But the narrowing is almost entirely the consequence of Trump picking up WNV/DKs. That's a trend that I would expect to see continue through to polling day.
However, unless the polls are not just understating Trump (which is a fair bet), but also over-estimating Biden, then it's still a very tough ask for Trump. Simply, if Biden clears 50% on the day, I simply can't see Trump winning.
I can see how he can re the vote. Massive wins for Biden in the deep blue states with big spokes in turnout by people who hate Trump (hence the increased vote share for Biden) but Trump does enough in the swing states and boosted by Biden's advantage with the Black vote being less than Clinton's in 2016.
That would explain the discrepancy between the national polls and the state polls.
Sorry to be obtuse, but just why is the Common Fisheries Policy so hated? Looks to me as though it's an effort to share out stocks reasonably fairly, although obviously various species of fish swim in different waters, due to temperature, food specials and so on.
Because it shares out our stocks between multiple nations.
When else do you ever see a nation's sovereign natural resource get shared out between countries? We don't share the North Sea Oil between the whole of Europe, why do we share our fish?
IIRC it was done that way by a Conservative government to secure special privileges for the City of London. But that was a bit before myt time.
It was also a convenient excuse fior overfishing/a whipping boy when conservation measures came in, eas it not?
And some of the fishermen had done their bit to share it out by selling their rights to non-UK nationals.
There's also the fact that fish swim around while oil stays put. This means that heavy fishing in one area can deplete the stocks in another, hence the need for a common fisheries policy.
Everyone (sensible anyway) agrees with the fact that there is a common interest in managing fish stocks
There are fundamental disagreements on how to do that
And the CFP is horribly adverse to U.K. interests - it was where Heath was legged over but accepted it as the price of getting a deal done on EC entry IIRC
CFP came later than the Heath deal. Mrs T was at the helm by then, see this take on the matter (which is not quite what is portrayed in Brexiter discourse)
I believe that when the U.K., Ireland, Denmark, and Norway applied to join the EU in the early 70’s the concept of the CFP was created toute suite by the original 6 as they eyed the vast waters that would now enter the EU. Norway voted not to join, partially as a consequence of what I’m sure they saw as a pretty naked grab for natural resources, that the four applicants had a lot of that the six didn’t.
Heath, swallowed it as the price of membership, and it has been a stone in the shoe ever since out of all proportion to the actual economic value (eg Mr Geldof and his meeting with fisher folk on the Thames a few days before the 2016 referendum as an example of how this whole thing as lingered like a bad smell ever since 1973).
If the EEC six had had an iota of sense they would’ve left well alone, but frankly they could resist.
Imagine if France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal were applying to join a Hanseatic league of Germany, Benelux, Denmark, and the U.K. and we dreamt up a common wine policy on the grounds the applicants had lots and we had very little, and proceeded to dish out the rights to the Loire Valley, Bordeaux, Rioja etc amongst us. I suspect that might’ve annoyed the French a tad for the past fifty years, and well beyond its monetary worth.
What goes around and all that....
Very well said.
And that is why Barnier in his still naked partisan attempt to cling on to what his forebears grabbed is on a hiding to nothing.
It is worth remembering too that if we do exit No Deal on 31/12 then that is it for the European fishermen he is negotiating on behalf. Their rights to fish in our waters expire overnight and like Iceland we would have exclusive rights to fish in our sovereign waters.
With no markets to sell them in...
No fleet to catch them with.
So you're saying there's a growth area of investment potential here? Potential new jobs and exports for our balance of trade?
Presumably you're all for it then?
You clearly aren't think through the garbage that you're writing.
I would have throught that the phrase "With no markets to sell them in..." was pretty clear - no FTA with the EU means no access to their fish markets.
Can try selling fish to the Japanese when that deal comes through though...
I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?
That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.
I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.
I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.
As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
Like surely, if you think Trump is going to win but you want a bit of insurance Trump +48.5 EC votes @1.68 is a better bet that Trump @2.02?
No - I don`t believe in insurance. Biden is going to win. Full steam ahead.
Yay.
I have bought EC supremacy at 28 for enough to not tell the wife.
Good luck.
I've got a bet with HYUFD that essentially Biden will win by 74 or more electoral college votes. What do you think of that?
I think you will win that bet. But you legged him over with 3/1 odds so you should be upright and offer to void it.
The current round of rioting is a complicating factor, increasing uncertainty of the outcome.
Certainly, Kenosha has enabled Trump to bash on about law and order with his base, and Trump is the only point of enthusiasm in this election.
But that is not a straightforward win for Trump - because for each uptick in enthusiasm he creates in his base, he causes a similar uptick in enthusiasm for voting against him, regardless of Biden being his opponent.
Personally, I expect - the Black vote to return to or even exceed the levels that Obama managed to turn out - the female vote to be extremely high, and more anti-Trump than ever - the Establishment GOP vote to be down or even turn Biden - Trump's core base to turn out big time.
This leads me to expect a big, but not perhaps huge, win for Biden, but with a high degree of uncertainty about that prediction. I think 70-100 EC win is about right.
Why do you think the Black vote is going to return to Obama levels or even exceed? There has been clear signs in the polls that Trump is picking up some support vs 2016. The murder rate has also gone up massively in a lot of the inner cities. Why is that going to make someone Black think "I must vote Biden"?
Re the Establishment GOP, they don't like Trump as much as ever but there is a fair few of them who were disgusted by the treatment of Kavanaugh. I suspect they will hold their noses.
I suspect there will be a lot more like this 2016 Trump voter:
"After losing two friends to COVID-19, Primus wishes the President would be a little more responsible about public health guidelines. (“Put a mask on in public appearances—just put it on!”) And she rolls her eyes at Trump’s penchant for outrageous statements. “Don’t compare this to golf, are you serious?” she says, referring to Trump’s comment that the officer who shot Blake “choked” like a golfer missing a tap-in putt. She shakes her head, as if she were scolding a dog who just can’t stop chewing on shoes.
Still, Primus says she will reluctantly vote for Trump again in November. She believes the Democrats have gone too far left, and opposes what she sees as the “anger” of the anti-Trump movement. “People didn’t like Trump getting elected, and they categorized anybody who voted for him, they called us racist and homophobic,” she says. “I feel like this campaign has been all about not liking Trump.”
Sorry, was not on for a while.
My theory re the Black vote this November is fueled by one of the BLM's reactions to the series of police killings this year - voter registration drives and community organizing to get out the vote. There is a determination to vote and get black representatives involved in government at all levels, not to support one of their own in breaking barriers (Obama), but to get decision-makers in place to start tackling the issues that white politicians of both stripes have failed to do even since the civil rights movement.
If the Black vote is turning out to vote for local and state representatives, they'll be there for the US elections - Pres, Senate and House - too.
I think you might see some of the same effect in the Latino vote, but not so pronounced as the Black vote.
No worries Tim, I'm the same
I can see this as a possibility but it doesn't feel like (certainly from the vibes I pick up) that there is a mass of inner-city Black votes that is enthused by Biden and feels the need to vote. The murder rate rocketing in these places is becoming a major issue.
Have to admit, I think Trump will do better in the Hispanic vote vs 2016. There has been constant suggestions of this in the polls throughout the year.
I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?
That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.
I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.
I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.
As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!
Comments
He became a Voodoo Pole!
My theory re the Black vote this November is fueled by one of the BLM's reactions to the series of police killings this year - voter registration drives and community organizing to get out the vote. There is a determination to vote and get black representatives involved in government at all levels, not to support one of their own in breaking barriers (Obama), but to get decision-makers in place to start tackling the issues that white politicians of both stripes have failed to do even since the civil rights movement.
If the Black vote is turning out to vote for local and state representatives, they'll be there for the US elections - Pres, Senate and House - too.
I think you might see some of the same effect in the Latino vote, but not so pronounced as the Black vote.
That would explain the discrepancy between the national polls and the state polls.
Can try selling fish to the Japanese when that deal comes through though...
As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
I can see this as a possibility but it doesn't feel like (certainly from the vibes I pick up) that there is a mass of inner-city Black votes that is enthused by Biden and feels the need to vote. The murder rate rocketing in these places is becoming a major issue.
Have to admit, I think Trump will do better in the Hispanic vote vs 2016. There has been constant suggestions of this in the polls throughout the year.
Sad!