politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting markets continue to rate Trump’s re-election chanc

SystemSystem Posts: 12,169
edited September 2020 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting markets continue to rate Trump’s re-election chances far too highly

At the start of February, Donald Trump looked well set for re-election. True, his personal ratings weren’t great and nor were his head-to-heads against both Biden and Sanders, the two Democrats who’d shared the lead in the race for their party’s nomination for the previous three months. Even so, the economy was roaring ahead with record job numbers, America was near-enough out of foreign wars, and the attempt to impeach him had not only failed but failed to land any serious blows. For all his personal pettiness and boorishness, he had a saleable case to put to the people. And he’s good at self-promotion.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    1st
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    1st
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    1st, 2nd and 3rd. Sweeping the medals table.

    Seriously, there seems to be an issue with editing and posting comments, but that aside ... I agree with David.

    Trump's alleged latest remarks about the war fallen, if true as seems likely, are an appalling example of why he is unfit to be in high office.

    https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-denies-calling-dead-us-soldiers-losers-and-suckers-12063179

    Back Biden.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Second. And test.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    CNN: Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the medical journal The Lancet, told CNN’s Becky Anderson on Friday that President Trump’s statement that a Covid-19 vaccine could be delivered by the end of October is “simply wrong.”

    “If we make a mistake and license a vaccine too early – just think – we have already got a growing anti-vaccine movement, which is extremely disturbing. We can't cut corners. There will not be a vaccine available for public use by the end of October. President Trump is simply wrong about that,” Horton said, adding: “I have no understanding why he is saying it. Because his advisers will surely be telling him that that's just impossible.”
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    USA President betting -- the header does not mention the longstanding Biden risk premium. Trump is the same price as a Republican victory, as you'd expect. Joe Biden has long been five or six basis points bigger than the Democrats, suggesting "the market" is not convinced he will be on the ticket in November (and btw I've no idea when the deadline for that is but presumably if Biden pulls out on the 2nd, he will still be the official candidate on the 3rd).

    Binden 1.96
    Democrat 1.9

    Trump 2.1
    Republican 2.1
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    USA President betting -- the header does not mention the longstanding Biden risk premium. Trump is the same price as a Republican victory, as you'd expect. Joe Biden has long been five or six basis points bigger than the Democrats, suggesting "the market" is not convinced he will be on the ticket in November (and btw I've no idea when the deadline for that is but presumably if Biden pulls out on the 2nd, he will still be the official candidate on the 3rd).

    Binden 1.96
    Democrat 1.9

    Trump 2.1
    Republican 2.1

    Or if you prefer a traditional bookmaker, Bet365 is best-priced on Joe Biden, and also gives the Biden risk premium.

    Biden 20/21
    Democrat 20/23

    Trump 20/23
    Republican 20/23
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    This election could get very messy. Trump has been encouraging his own supporters to commit vote fraud, presumably so he can point to vote fraud in November.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    US election debates schedule:

    Biden vs Trump:
    Tuesday, 29 September
    Thursday, 15 October
    Thursday, 22 October

    The vice presidential debate is scheduled to take place on Wednesday, 7 October.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_debates
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    edited September 2020
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,603
    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,463
    Good morning everyone. Enjoyed watching England pull everything out of the fire ion the cricket lat night. Something good for a change!
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    edited September 2020
    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    Folksy stories worked well for Reagan.
    As for being 'all there' - you do realise that the alternative is Trump?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,603
    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited September 2020
    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,463
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    Perhaps that says more, or at least as much, about how people at the top of the US view the UK now.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    The non-bonkers answer to that question is "a team of highly competent Obama administration technocrats", not sure what the bonkers answer is going to be though.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    https://twitter.com/mjhegar/status/1301927231774695424
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    That to me is a story about the ineffectuality of the PM in 2013 in steering a meeting (sure it wasn't the deputy PM?), and about Biden's staying power.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    Trump’s disdain for military veterans goes back decades.

    Trump’s War on Disabled Veteran Vendors
    https://www.politico.com/magazine/gallery/2016/05/trumps-war-on-disabled-veteran-vendors-000637?slide=0
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    So maybe he’s always been like that? Hence the reputation for gaffes.

    Not so different from someone important closer to home, come to think of it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    The experience of a president who disregards and disrespects all his advisors isn’t working out too well.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    Never did Reagan any harm
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    Trump plays defense with the military weeks before election
    It's a difficult situation for the president, who since being elected has surrounded himself with military trappings.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/trump-military-relationship-election-409257

    Mike’s Texas bet might have been exceptionally shrewdly timed.
    ... And it’s those voters — military, dependents, veterans and civilians who revere the military — who are key to his reelection. States that are up for grabs this cycle, including Texas, Florida and North Carolina, are also home to large numbers of military families and veterans...

    It’s very far from a slam dunk for Biden, but 4.5 on Betfair now seems far too long. Should be a bit under 3, IMO.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    IshmaelZ said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    That to me is a story about the ineffectuality of the PM in 2013 in steering a meeting (sure it wasn't the deputy PM?), and about Biden's staying power.
    And perhaps the then administration’s lack of interest in our agenda ?
    There’s plenty of other evidence that Biden was an unusually effective VP, however idiosyncratic.

    (That’s no proof of his current fitness, obviously.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209
    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    In both the second Reagan term, and in the first Bush one, there were serious doubts as to the mental acuity of the President, so this is not a new issue.

    But this isn't really about Biden's fitness. Only one thing matters. Do you believe in the American *system* of government?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    I’m not sure about that.
    On the other side of the coin you have Trump’s four years of using the military as a prop (and his recent suggestions that they be used on US streets).
    And four years more evidence of his disdain for them.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Stuck the swab down by throat and up my nose. Sealed it up in the special plastic vial. Sealed the vial into the airtight plastic bag. Sealed the plastic bag into the special biohazard bag with the adhesive seal. Sealed that bag into the special box.

    Now just the collection to wait for, could be anytime soon.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    McCain was the original Never-Trumper, and there was a racist element to the 2016 Gold family story which would have played well with his base.
    Trump seems to have disrespected the entire military this time, it won't shift too many votes I expect - but I can't see it adding to his tally whilst this is in the news cycle and he's behind right now.
    The protests/riots were more of a wedge issue which probably electorally works better for Trump. Again, this has taken those out of the top of the news cycle.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    Biden is certainly old, but I see no evidence of dementia. I think he has always been a bit of a rambler.

    However, when older people do lose their faculties and sharpness, their values and instincts tend to remain. Biden is basically a nice guy who empathises with those in difficulty, and that would remain.

    It would be a major step up for America. Indeed someone who cared about others would be a major step up for our government too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    https://twitter.com/drug_smolecules/status/1302042516221571072
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    edited September 2020
    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/drug_smolecules/status/1302042516221571072

    November 4th then.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    https://twitter.com/aravosis/status/1301991095904202756
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    https://twitter.com/Timodc/status/1302070601255796736
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    https://twitter.com/aravosis/status/1301991095904202756
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    Supposing there's a deadlock 269 votes each?
    I found this on Quora:

    "If it happened today, with the two candidates presumably deadlocked at 269 EVs each (the map shows one plausible way it could happen), the same thing would happen and the House would have to decide who the President will be. There might also be a third choice if a faithless elector cast a ballot for someone else, since the Constitution makes the top three vote-getters in the EC eligible to be chosen. So if a pledged Trump elector decided to say, vote for Mitt Romney instead of Trump, making the tally Biden 269, Trump 268, and Romney 1, the House could choose to elect Romney if it wished, even if he didn’t receive a single popular vote. (Biden still wouldn’t win, because you have to have 270.)

    This would be something like a repeat scenario of 1824, when the House also had to decide an election in which four candidates got EVs and none got a majority. This time, John Quincy Adams became President because Henry Clay played the role of Alexander Hamilton and got the House to choose Adams.

    Since the Republicans will likely control more states in the House (albeit with fewer total Representatives), this is what I expect would happen in the event of a tie. Democrats and a few states with a majority of never-Trump Republicans in the House would conspire to elect the third choice (some milquetoast Republican like Romney or John Kasich). In return, the Senate would elect Kamala Harris as VP—or the Dems would just simply do so if they had the majority. No one would be happy, but Trump would be gone."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    I think it’s fair to say this story is cutting through in a way previous ones didn’t.

    https://twitter.com/RooseveltTed/status/1301971598732398592
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    https://twitter.com/votevets/status/1301868835998400515
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    rcs1000 said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    In both the second Reagan term, and in the first Bush one, there were serious doubts as to the mental acuity of the President, so this is not a new issue.

    But this isn't really about Biden's fitness. Only one thing matters. Do you believe in the American *system* of government?
    If that is the question then Trump is home and hosed. The evidence from China, Russia and Iraq is most people don't give a stuff about their system of government provided the lights stay on. Even in Britain, the question is not the degree to which Boris undermines our democratic conventions but whether our schools will stay open long enough to train sufficient customs staff and trawler crews to see us through next year.

    This is the weakness of the anti-Trump case. Sure, Trump's an arse, no-one's denying that, but what about jobs, guns and vaccines?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    logical_song said:

    Since the Republicans will likely control more states in the House (albeit with fewer total Representatives), this is what I expect would happen in the event of a tie. Democrats and a few states with a majority of never-Trump Republicans in the House would conspire to elect the third choice (some milquetoast Republican like Romney or John Kasich). In return, the Senate would elect Kamala Harris as VP—or the Dems would just simply do so if they had the majority. No one would be happy, but Trump would be gone."

    Has anybody counted the never-Trump Republicans who would join the Dems in this scenario? They'd almost definitely lose their next primary, and many of the ones who really couldn't stand Trump have already moved on.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    Looking at the next 8 weeks, I see a Trump implosion much more likely than a Biden one. I reckon the value is on a Biden landslide.

    Trump less than 200EV imo, and less than 150 quite possible.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    Scott_xP said:

    https://twitter.com/aravosis/status/1301991095904202756

    ... but, but Biden is a bit confused nowadays.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,805
    Mr. B2, hope it's all clear.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    edited September 2020
    logical_song said:

    Supposing there's a deadlock 269 votes each?
    I found this on Quora:

    "If it happened today, with the two candidates presumably deadlocked at 269 EVs each (the map shows one plausible way it could happen), the same thing would happen and the House would have to decide who the President will be. There might also be a third choice if a faithless elector cast a ballot for someone else, since the Constitution makes the top three vote-getters in the EC eligible to be chosen. So if a pledged Trump elector decided to say, vote for Mitt Romney instead of Trump, making the tally Biden 269, Trump 268, and Romney 1, the House could choose to elect Romney if it wished, even if he didn’t receive a single popular vote. (Biden still wouldn’t win, because you have to have 270.)

    This would be something like a repeat scenario of 1824, when the House also had to decide an election in which four candidates got EVs and none got a majority. This time, John Quincy Adams became President because Henry Clay played the role of Alexander Hamilton and got the House to choose Adams.

    Since the Republicans will likely control more states in the House (albeit with fewer total Representatives), this is what I expect would happen in the event of a tie. Democrats and a few states with a majority of never-Trump Republicans in the House would conspire to elect the third choice (some milquetoast Republican like Romney or John Kasich). In return, the Senate would elect Kamala Harris as VP—or the Dems would just simply do so if they had the majority. No one would be happy, but Trump would be gone."

    Hmmm. If Trump was to feel cheated losing on a fair and square EC vote, I can only imagine what he might unleash on your scenario.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Since the Republicans will likely control more states in the House (albeit with fewer total Representatives), this is what I expect would happen in the event of a tie. Democrats and a few states with a majority of never-Trump Republicans in the House would conspire to elect the third choice (some milquetoast Republican like Romney or John Kasich). In return, the Senate would elect Kamala Harris as VP—or the Dems would just simply do so if they had the majority. No one would be happy, but Trump would be gone."

    Has anybody counted the never-Trump Republicans who would join the Dems in this scenario? They'd almost definitely lose their next primary, and many of the ones who really couldn't stand Trump have already moved on.
    We're talking about faithless electors here not members of congress, so it is possible albeit unlikely.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    I think 2019 was more anti-Semitism and being unwholesomely careful about jumping to conclusions about who Putin did and didn't poison, they both dropped mainly after 2017.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    McCain chose Sarah Palin. Is there a third option.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is the weakness of the anti-Trump case. Sure, Trump's an arse, no-one's denying that, but what about jobs, guns and vaccines?

    https://twitter.com/RosenzweigP/status/1302053489246441472
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    Biden is certainly old, but I see no evidence of dementia. I think he has always been a bit of a rambler.

    However, when older people do lose their faculties and sharpness, their values and instincts tend to remain. Biden is basically a nice guy who empathises with those in difficulty, and that would remain.

    It would be a major step up for America. Indeed someone who cared about others would be a major step up for our government too.
    I think that’s a fair summary.
    He’s rambly, but he still gets to the point.

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1301935608395444226
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited September 2020
    Alistair said:


    McCain chose Sarah Palin. Is there a third option.

    Jeb!
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    Alistair said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    McCain chose Sarah Palin. Is there a third option.
    ... and he regretted it.
    https://nypost.com/2018/05/06/john-mccain-i-regret-picking-sarah-palin-as-running-mate/
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    I’m not sure about that.
    On the other side of the coin you have Trump’s four years of using the military as a prop (and his recent suggestions that they be used on US streets).
    And four years more evidence of his disdain for them.
    This is the point though, he's been doing it since forever, it's in the price.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    edmundintokyo said:

    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    I think 2019 was more anti-Semitism and being unwholesomely careful about jumping to conclusions about who Putin did and didn't poison, they both dropped mainly after 2017.
    I suspect it was because in 2019 the attacks were made under the radar on social media. If Corbyn did not know he was being attacked for meeting the IRA, he could not defend himself, as he had previously done, by claiming he was promoting peace, to take one example.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    Some interesting data here:

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1302148044457234433?s=09
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Lol

    Baroness Davidson phoning up the BBC to complain about being called Baroness Davidson.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,603
    Mysticrose said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    Never did Reagan any harm
    If you ignore little things like Iran-Contra that went on because we had a folksy President getting dementia in the White House....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    Talking about refusing to condemn Putin for poisoning political opponents...

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1302002662469251072

    https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1302034316122370048
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Whoops, looks like Trump’s really put his foot in it with military veterans overnight. They were one group that were happy with him getting out of foreign wars, but those comments as reported are crass in the extreme. He’ll be praying he can brazen it out and that no-one has a recording. Which, if someone does have a recording, is exactly what they hope the President will do.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,464
    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    https://twitter.com/adamslily/status/1302038123074015232
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    The Republican Party is pretty much entirely behind Trump at this point. This is a good argument for why Trump may improve on 2016, I think it was @MrEd who was making it; In 2016 there was definitely a large part of the GOP machine that didn't support him, and/or considered his candidacy a lost cause. Trump was also notoriously disorganized about driving it. These things won't be true this time, no matter how much he offends the Jeb Bush tendency.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    IMO the turning point was the Russian terrorist attack in Salisbury in 2018, and Corbyn’s reaction to it.

    The antisemitism stuff also became much more prominent through 2018 and 2019, as elements of the Labour Party pushed back against it and the EHRC launched their investigation.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1302114169332862976
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1302114834805391360
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Scott_xP said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
    Mayor Pete's got all the right lines but he just looks that little bit too smug to carry it off...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,603
    rcs1000 said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    In both the second Reagan term, and in the first Bush one, there were serious doubts as to the mental acuity of the President, so this is not a new issue.

    But this isn't really about Biden's fitness. Only one thing matters. Do you believe in the American *system* of government?
    I'd like to think the 25th Amendment would be used in this *system* of Government, rather than keep a figurehead in place whilst another unelected tier of officialdom wielded power.

    (Also - worth pointing out, for any future betting, that somebody appointed under the 25th Amendment is only an acting President and does not officially have the title of President themselves. So next President Harris might not be the slam dunk some might assume...she'd still have to win an election, or succeed through the death of Biden.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    edmundintokyo said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    The Republican Party is pretty much entirely behind Trump at this point. This is a good argument for why Trump may improve on 2016, I think it was @MrEd who was making it; In 2016 there was definitely a large part of the GOP machine that didn't support him, and/or considered his candidacy a lost cause. Trump was also notoriously disorganized about driving it. These things won't be true this time, no matter how much he offends the Jeb Bush tendency.
    Except that tendency is now far less likely to hold their nose and vote for Trump (see @rcs1000 ’s comments). Sure, the true believers are more locked in than ever, but that does not constitute the entire Republican vote.

    This Atlantic article sets out both why you are right, and why you are wrong.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/predicate-fear/616009/
    ... I know plenty of Trump supporters, and I know many of them to be people of integrity in important areas of their lives. Indeed, some are friends I cherish. But if there is a line Donald Trump could cross that would forfeit the loyalty of his core supporters—including, and in some respects especially, white evangelical Christians—I can’t imagine what it would be. And that is a rather depressing thing to admit.

    Polarization and political tribalism are not new to America; fear and hatred for our fellow citizens have been increasing for decades. We’ve had plenty of presidents who have failed us, in ways large and small. But this moment is different because Donald Trump is different, and because Donald Trump is president. His relentless assault on truth and the institutions of democracy—his provocations and abuse of power, his psychological instability and his emotional volatility, his delusions and his incompetence—are unlike anything we’ve seen before. He needs to be stopped. And his supporters can’t say, as they did in 2016, that they just didn’t know. Now we know. It’s not too late—it’s never too late—to do the right thing....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,603
    Alistair said:

    Lol

    Baroness Davidson phoning up the BBC to complain about being called Baroness Davidson.

    Perhaps Baroness Davidson should consult Lady Nugee on how Lady Nugee manages not to be called Lady Nugee by the BBC.....
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Foxy said:

    Looking at the next 8 weeks, I see a Trump implosion much more likely than a Biden one. I reckon the value is on a Biden landslide.

    Trump less than 200EV imo, and less than 150 quite possible.

    Yes. This is me too.

    Good poll lead now, a few weeks to go, a volatile climate, movement can be either way but the betting markets are effectively assigning a probability of zero to that movement being towards Biden.

    Long of Biden EC supremacy at 28.

    I wouldn't swap my position for all the tea in China.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,191
    Pulpstar said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    McCain was the original Never-Trumper, and there was a racist element to the 2016 Gold family story which would have played well with his base.
    Trump seems to have disrespected the entire military this time, it won't shift too many votes I expect - but I can't see it adding to his tally whilst this is in the news cycle and he's behind right now.
    The protests/riots were more of a wedge issue which probably electorally works better for Trump. Again, this has taken those out of the top of the news cycle.
    Yes, the 2016 story was basically Muslims who happened to be Gold Star parents calling Trump out on his islamophobia. Islamophobia is widely accepted, even popular, so it didn't hurt him much. This story, I hope, will hurt him more.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,315
    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    So articulate. So pleasant.

    Why the hell couldn’t the US have had candidates like these to choose from instead of the senile old tossers they now have?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,717
    MarqueeMark said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    In both the second Reagan term, and in the first Bush one, there were serious doubts as to the mental acuity of the President, so this is not a new issue.

    But this isn't really about Biden's fitness. Only one thing matters. Do you believe in the American *system* of government?
    I'd like to think the 25th Amendment would be used in this *system* of Government, rather than keep a figurehead in place whilst another unelected tier of officialdom wielded power.

    (Also - worth pointing out, for any future betting, that somebody appointed under the 25th Amendment is only an acting President and does not officially have the title of President themselves. So next President Harris might not be the slam dunk some might assume...she'd still have to win an election, or succeed through the death of Biden.
    Or his resignation.

    More likely a Wilson like resignation than 25th Ammendment IMO.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,315
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    I think 2019 was more anti-Semitism and being unwholesomely careful about jumping to conclusions about who Putin did and didn't poison, they both dropped mainly after 2017.
    I suspect it was because in 2019 the attacks were made under the radar on social media. If Corbyn did not know he was being attacked for meeting the IRA, he could not defend himself, as he had previously done, by claiming he was promoting peace, to take one example.
    In 2017 the IRA stuff seemed like history. Skripal changed things. It highlighted Corbyn’s unwillingness to stand up against this country’s enemies. The IRA stuff resonated then in a way it had not before. It became part of a pattern.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Sandpit said:

    They were one group that were happy with him getting out of foreign wars, but those comments as reported are crass in the extreme. .

    It's not that simple. A significant proportion are very keen to get sent "down range". They might not think it's a great idea afterwards but there are plenty who are desperate to go to war. (I was one such.)

    I wonder if Gen. Kelly will weigh in. The USMC battalion that Trump disparaged as "suckers" for getting killed at Bellau Wood was 3/5 "Dark Horse". Gen. Kelly's oldest son was in 3/5 when he was KIA in Afghanistan.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited September 2020
    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    The Republican Party is pretty much entirely behind Trump at this point. This is a good argument for why Trump may improve on 2016, I think it was @MrEd who was making it; In 2016 there was definitely a large part of the GOP machine that didn't support him, and/or considered his candidacy a lost cause. Trump was also notoriously disorganized about driving it. These things won't be true this time, no matter how much he offends the Jeb Bush tendency.
    Except that tendency is now far less likely to hold their nose and vote for Trump (see @rcs1000 ’s comments). Sure, the true believers are more locked in than ever, but that does not constitute the entire Republican vote.

    This Atlantic article sets out both why you are right, and why you are wrong.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/predicate-fear/616009/
    ... I know plenty of Trump supporters, and I know many of them to be people of integrity in important areas of their lives. Indeed, some are friends I cherish. But if there is a line Donald Trump could cross that would forfeit the loyalty of his core supporters—including, and in some respects especially, white evangelical Christians—I can’t imagine what it would be. And that is a rather depressing thing to admit.

    Polarization and political tribalism are not new to America; fear and hatred for our fellow citizens have been increasing for decades. We’ve had plenty of presidents who have failed us, in ways large and small. But this moment is different because Donald Trump is different, and because Donald Trump is president. His relentless assault on truth and the institutions of democracy—his provocations and abuse of power, his psychological instability and his emotional volatility, his delusions and his incompetence—are unlike anything we’ve seen before. He needs to be stopped. And his supporters can’t say, as they did in 2016, that they just didn’t know. Now we know. It’s not too late—it’s never too late—to do the right thing....
    I don't disagree with anything in there but @swing_voter 's point was about the *machine*, ie local GOP parties, GOP activists etc - the people who have to knock on doors make calls and GOTV. They're 100% behind Trump this time, and they weren't in 2016.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    edmundintokyo said:

    Scott_xP said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
    Mayor Pete's got all the right lines but he just looks that little bit too smug to carry it off...
    It's like how Rishi will never be PM because he's the same height and weight as Bonnie Langford.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,137
    edited September 2020
    Scott_xP said:

    https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1302114169332862976

    If Trump is re elected Buttigieg will be a strong contender for the 2024 Democratic nomination against VP Pence.

    Even if Trump loses Butitigieg will likely be on the Harris shortlist for VP nominee assuming Biden only serves one term
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    So articulate. So pleasant.

    Why the hell couldn’t the US have had candidates like these to choose from instead of the senile old tossers they now have?
    Joe Biden is older than is ideal for a candidate for US president but he is not senile. He's 77 and acts like it.

    Would we be diagnosing any other elderly man who fails to look and speak like somebody much younger as senile? I don't think so.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,315
    edited September 2020
    Scott_xP said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
    This idea that there is a real Republican Party which will reappear when Trump goes may be a comforting one. But I fear that it may be an illusion: the Republican Party is now tied to Trump and his values and what he has made of it.

    Parties change. We should not assume that there is some true essence carefully preserved somewhere in some distant place which will survive and grow again when current troubles pass. The Republican Party of Eisenhower has turned into the party of Trump. The Tory party has turned into a mix of Ukip and the Brexit party.

    After 2 defeats Labour turned into Corbyn’s party - and may now turn into something else - we’ll see.

    But if it does it will be because, in part, of last December’s humongous defeat and how much actual change there will be is still an open question. It is not at all clear that it will turn back into what it used to be.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    Cyclefree said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    I think 2019 was more anti-Semitism and being unwholesomely careful about jumping to conclusions about who Putin did and didn't poison, they both dropped mainly after 2017.
    I suspect it was because in 2019 the attacks were made under the radar on social media. If Corbyn did not know he was being attacked for meeting the IRA, he could not defend himself, as he had previously done, by claiming he was promoting peace, to take one example.
    In 2017 the IRA stuff seemed like history. Skripal changed things. It highlighted Corbyn’s unwillingness to stand up against this country’s enemies. The IRA stuff resonated then in a way it had not before. It became part of a pattern.
    Yes, that is true but (or and, if you prefer) most it was below the radar. CCHQ's MO was, I suspect, to make small-scale social media tests to see what attacks resonated with which groups of voters, then go in hard and late with microtargeted attacks. It is consistent with what we know from Cummings and the Brexit campaign, though we might need to wait for the memoirs for full details.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    After yesterday and Biden's passionate and angry reply to Trump's comments on the military who have lost their lives, Biden should be about a 90% chance in my opinion.

    The numbers are clear. There's no guarantee of course but it's going to take something huge to swing this around and frankly it's going the wrong way for Trump at the minute.

    Trump could win, but a Carter style humiliation looks more likely to me than a Trump victory.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Dura_Ace said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Scott_xP said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
    Mayor Pete's got all the right lines but he just looks that little bit too smug to carry it off...
    It's like how Rishi will never be PM because he's the same height and weight as Bonnie Langford.
    I was wondering who he reminded me of.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298
    I think it's a mistake for the Dems to try to convert Republicans. They might get lent their votes, but I suspect even that is asking too much.

    Instead I think they have to convince republicans Trump isn't worth voting for, and move heaven and earth to get Dem voters to turn up.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    edmundintokyo said:

    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    The Republican Party is pretty much entirely behind Trump at this point. This is a good argument for why Trump may improve on 2016, I think it was @MrEd who was making it; In 2016 there was definitely a large part of the GOP machine that didn't support him, and/or considered his candidacy a lost cause. Trump was also notoriously disorganized about driving it. These things won't be true this time, no matter how much he offends the Jeb Bush tendency.
    Except that tendency is now far less likely to hold their nose and vote for Trump (see @rcs1000 ’s comments). Sure, the true believers are more locked in than ever, but that does not constitute the entire Republican vote.

    This Atlantic article sets out both why you are right, and why you are wrong.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/predicate-fear/616009/
    ... I know plenty of Trump supporters, and I know many of them to be people of integrity in important areas of their lives. Indeed, some are friends I cherish. But if there is a line Donald Trump could cross that would forfeit the loyalty of his core supporters—including, and in some respects especially, white evangelical Christians—I can’t imagine what it would be. And that is a rather depressing thing to admit.

    Polarization and political tribalism are not new to America; fear and hatred for our fellow citizens have been increasing for decades. We’ve had plenty of presidents who have failed us, in ways large and small. But this moment is different because Donald Trump is different, and because Donald Trump is president. His relentless assault on truth and the institutions of democracy—his provocations and abuse of power, his psychological instability and his emotional volatility, his delusions and his incompetence—are unlike anything we’ve seen before. He needs to be stopped. And his supporters can’t say, as they did in 2016, that they just didn’t know. Now we know. It’s not too late—it’s never too late—to do the right thing....
    I don't disagree with anything in there but @swing_voter 's point was about the *machine*, ie local GOP parties, GOP activists etc - the people who have to knock on doors make calls and GOTV. They're 100% behind Trump this time, and they weren't in 2016.
    How much is that worth ?
    0.5% perhaps ?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,315
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Alistair said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    logical_song said:

    Pulpstar said:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302083885384249344

    He's up and raging at the liberal media of err.. *checks notes* Fox News.

    I think this is what is going to cut through most of all.
    Americans don't like their military veterans being disrespected. The rainy day in France when Trump chose not to go with the other world leaders and show his respect will probably now seal his, and his party's, fate.
    Didn't we have basically this exact same storyline in 2016 with the John McCain and that thing with the Gold Star Parents? I know Biden is executing the attack way better than Hillary did, but if it didn't kill Trump in 2016 then I don't think it'll kill him now, what with all that other stuff going on. (Not that you can kill someone who's already dead, but you know what I mean...)
    Yes. Absoluyely Correct and an important observation.

    However... in 2019 we also had "isn't this all the same stuff with Corbyn and terrorism loving as in 2017?". I know I certainly thought that the attacks were played out. But the second time around they seemed to cut through.
    I think 2019 was more anti-Semitism and being unwholesomely careful about jumping to conclusions about who Putin did and didn't poison, they both dropped mainly after 2017.
    I suspect it was because in 2019 the attacks were made under the radar on social media. If Corbyn did not know he was being attacked for meeting the IRA, he could not defend himself, as he had previously done, by claiming he was promoting peace, to take one example.
    In 2017 the IRA stuff seemed like history. Skripal changed things. It highlighted Corbyn’s unwillingness to stand up against this country’s enemies. The IRA stuff resonated then in a way it had not before. It became part of a pattern.
    Yes, that is true but (or and, if you prefer) most it was below the radar. CCHQ's MO was, I suspect, to make small-scale social media tests to see what attacks resonated with which groups of voters, then go in hard and late with microtargeted attacks. It is consistent with what we know from Cummings and the Brexit campaign, though we might need to wait for the memoirs for full details.
    Yes - I’m sure that was part of it. Having listened to that Corbynism podcast I was struck by how many Labour insiders recognised at the time how disastrous Corbyn’s response to Skripal was. In one programme on Scotland a Labour canvasser during the 2019 election found one of the voters berating her over the IRA stuff quite unprompted and the neighbours joining in. It was in a constituency with strong military connections. So the micro-targeting will have had an effect in a way that it didn’t in 2017 because of Corbyn’s strategic mistake over Russia.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edmundintokyo said:



    I don't disagree with anything in there but @swing_voter 's point was about the *machine*, ie local GOP parties, GOP activists etc - the people who have to knock on doors make calls and GOTV. They're 100% behind Trump this time, and they weren't in 2016.

    The huge wildcard is that the Dems are basically campaigning virtually at the moment, it is all phonebanking and online outreach whereas the GOP know Coronavirus is a hoax and are going door to door.

    This could have a huge impact.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,137
    edited September 2020
    Firstly it should be pointed out that of the 5 Presidents defeated since 1900, only 1, Carter was like Trump in only the first term of his party in the White House and Reagan was a far better candidate than Biden.

    Second, it should be remembered Hillary also led the RCP poll average in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in 2016 too, only Trafalgar Group had Trump ahead in any of those states and Trafalgar Group still has Trump ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin, though it has Biden ahead in Pennsylvania.

    Third, Trump is actually retaining more of his 2016 vote than Biden is retaining Hillary voters. 91% of Trump 2016 voters are still voting for him compared to just 7% who have switched to Biden however only 88% of Clinton voters are voting for Biden compared to 9% who have switched to Trump. Biden is only ahead as third party voters from 2016 are breaking for him over Trump 59% to 18% but no reason they may not go back to third party or stay home.
    https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/august-2020-presidential-race-tightens-after-party-conventions

    So do not rule Trump out yet
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Cyclefree said:

    Scott_xP said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    That's entirely the point of the Buttigieg intervention

    You can be a real Republican, or you can support trump...
    This idea that there is a real Republican Party which will reappear when Trump goes may be a comforting one. But I fear that it may be an illusion: the Republican Party is now tied to Trump and his values and what he has made of it.
    Tom Cotton GOP Candidate for 2024, you mark my words. Guaranteed fact.

    DISCLAIMER: Previously I though that Sherrod Brown was nailed on for 2020 for the Dems.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    swing_voter said:

    How important is the Republican machine to Trump? If the party activists lose the faith (and I mean the machinery that fights elections and gets the Vote out) in favour of fighting for local Senate/Congressmen and not Trump could that accelerate the (possible) defeat. From a distance is there any sense the Reps decide to abandon him?

    The Republican Party is pretty much entirely behind Trump at this point. This is a good argument for why Trump may improve on 2016, I think it was @MrEd who was making it; In 2016 there was definitely a large part of the GOP machine that didn't support him, and/or considered his candidacy a lost cause. Trump was also notoriously disorganized about driving it. These things won't be true this time, no matter how much he offends the Jeb Bush tendency.
    Except that tendency is now far less likely to hold their nose and vote for Trump (see @rcs1000 ’s comments). Sure, the true believers are more locked in than ever, but that does not constitute the entire Republican vote.

    This Atlantic article sets out both why you are right, and why you are wrong.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/predicate-fear/616009/
    ... I know plenty of Trump supporters, and I know many of them to be people of integrity in important areas of their lives. Indeed, some are friends I cherish. But if there is a line Donald Trump could cross that would forfeit the loyalty of his core supporters—including, and in some respects especially, white evangelical Christians—I can’t imagine what it would be. And that is a rather depressing thing to admit.

    Polarization and political tribalism are not new to America; fear and hatred for our fellow citizens have been increasing for decades. We’ve had plenty of presidents who have failed us, in ways large and small. But this moment is different because Donald Trump is different, and because Donald Trump is president. His relentless assault on truth and the institutions of democracy—his provocations and abuse of power, his psychological instability and his emotional volatility, his delusions and his incompetence—are unlike anything we’ve seen before. He needs to be stopped. And his supporters can’t say, as they did in 2016, that they just didn’t know. Now we know. It’s not too late—it’s never too late—to do the right thing....
    I don't disagree with anything in there but @swing_voter 's point was about the *machine*, ie local GOP parties, GOP activists etc - the people who have to knock on doors make calls and GOTV. They're 100% behind Trump this time, and they weren't in 2016.
    How much is that worth ?
    0.5% perhaps ?
    I'd guess something like that, but who knows
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,131
    MarqueeMark said:

    Foxy said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Heard an interesting first-hand anecdote about when Biden visited the UK some 9 years ago, from a person in the room when he met the PM.

    The meeting was 45 minutes long, with an agenda of multiple points to cover. Except, Biden sat down and proceeded to spend those 45 minutes just telling folksy stories. It led to thoughts of "Is he all there?".

    The expectation from the person telling me the story was that if Biden gets elected, no way he serves a full term.

    They still reckoned a Trump second term more likely. FWIW.

    What America needs is a bit of folksy Americana, to regenerate a bit of unity.
    But if that's all there is?

    The question about a Biden presidency will be "Who is actually wielding the power in the White House?"
    A problem for another day.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,315
    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    So articulate. So pleasant.

    Why the hell couldn’t the US have had candidates like these to choose from instead of the senile old tossers they now have?
    Joe Biden is older than is ideal for a candidate for US president but he is not senile. He's 77 and acts like it.

    Would we be diagnosing any other elderly man who fails to look and speak like somebody much younger as senile? I don't think so.
    To me it feels as if it is time to pass on to a younger generation. Biden may be fine for now. But this election is for the next 4, possibly, 8 years. Titian may have painted some of his greatest works in his 70’s and 80’s but having a gerontocracy in power does not seem optimal to me.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,463
    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/EJDionne/status/1302070517420130304

    So articulate. So pleasant.

    Why the hell couldn’t the US have had candidates like these to choose from instead of the senile old tossers they now have?
    Joe Biden is older than is ideal for a candidate for US president but he is not senile. He's 77 and acts like it.

    Would we be diagnosing any other elderly man who fails to look and speak like somebody much younger as senile? I don't think so.
    I sincerely hope not!

    (Declaration of interest; I'm older than Big G)
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Scott_xP said:

    https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1302114169332862976

    Terrible line from Pete. Never mention your opponents supporters in a way that can be taken as a slur even if you don;t mean it that way. He's just called Trump voters stupid.
This discussion has been closed.