I'm sorry the more I think about this the more I think this is just too convenient a way to turn over the whole card table just a month or so from the election from a man who it appears has lost.
Do I need to call the men in white coats?
Have I lost touch with reality?
No. That didn't cross my mind, but it was my wife's first thought.
I did float the question of a hoax early in this thread
Surely not
I understand why people would consider this, because most of what Trump says is a falsehood. However, keep it simple.
The diagnosis means that Trump has to cancel rallies. Trump loves his rallies more than anything, except perhaps fawning over foreign dictators. Trump would not voluntarily give up on his rallies. The diagnosis is not a hoax.
Persuasive logic. I think you're right.
How will all those Trump supporting 'Covid is hoax' nutters take this news?
Deep State trying to sabotage his election campaign.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
No, but he would get sworn in as the next president.
But if he gets sworn in before next January Betfair won't payout on that.
No, but if the Trump/Pence ticket wins in November they would still pay out even if Trump doesn't get sworn in.
Back in 2016 Betfair said they wouldn't pay out Paine winning if Hillary was dead/incapacitated even if Hillary/Paine won the election and the electoral college vote.
I suspect IBAS are going to be kept busy like they were with the Theresa May exit market fiasco.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
If Trump resigns/is incacipated/dies, and still wins the election, Pence becomes president, under one of the amendments (someone quoted which one, above)
But that would be under the 25th Amendment, Betfair will only pay out on those who become President via the 12th Amendment.
No, they say they'll pay out when it becomes clear who has the EVs. If Trump is gone before the election, it will be clear that all of 'his' electors will pledge instead for Pence so if Trump/Pence wins a majority of EVs then it's clear that Pence continues as the president.
These would not be faithless electors, as described in the Betfair rules.
I don't see how BF wouldn't pay on Pence in this scenario.
Because in several states the electoral college voters are required by law to vote for the person who won the state, even if that person is dead.
'There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.'
I've been banging on for ages that is has the potential to get very messy.
Are you saying that if Trump dies on 31st October (spooky) and the Republicans win the election with 275 ECV. Then some Republican Electroral Collegiates will vote Trump, some others will vote Pence and Biden will have the most votes with 263 ECV?
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
No, but he would get sworn in as the next president.
But if he gets sworn in before next January Betfair won't payout on that.
No, but if the Trump/Pence ticket wins in November they would still pay out even if Trump doesn't get sworn in.
Back in 2016 Betfair said they wouldn't pay out Paine winning if Hillary was dead/incapacitated even if Hillary/Paine won the election and the electoral college vote.
I suspect IBAS are going to be kept busy like they were with the Theresa May exit market fiasco.
I managed to escape the exit market debacle with a profit.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
If Trump resigns/is incacipated/dies, and still wins the election, Pence becomes president, under one of the amendments (someone quoted which one, above)
But that would be under the 25th Amendment, Betfair will only pay out on those who become President via the 12th Amendment.
No, they say they'll pay out when it becomes clear who has the EVs. If Trump is gone before the election, it will be clear that all of 'his' electors will pledge instead for Pence so if Trump/Pence wins a majority of EVs then it's clear that Pence continues as the president.
These would not be faithless electors, as described in the Betfair rules.
I don't see how BF wouldn't pay on Pence in this scenario.
Because in several states the electoral college voters are required by law to vote for the person who won the state, even if that person is dead.
'There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.'
I've been banging on for ages that is has the potential to get very messy.
Are you saying that if Trump dies on 31st October (spooky) and the Republicans win the election with 275 ECV. Then some Republican Electroral Collegiates will vote Trump, some others will vote Pence and Biden will have the most votes with 263 ECV?
That would just be stupid.
There's the potential for that, and yes it would be stupid, but this is 2020.
We're in unprecedented times, with several states with different laws, and an even number of Justices on the Supreme Court, in the event of a tie there, the decision of the lower court is upheld.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
No, but he would get sworn in as the next president.
But if he gets sworn in before next January Betfair won't payout on that.
No, but if the Trump/Pence ticket wins in November they would still pay out even if Trump doesn't get sworn in.
Back in 2016 Betfair said they wouldn't pay out Paine winning if Hillary was dead/incapacitated even if Hillary/Paine won the election and the electoral college vote.
I suspect IBAS are going to be kept busy like they were with the Theresa May exit market fiasco.
I managed to escape the exit market debacle with a profit.
"Once voting (whether postal, electronic or at the ballot box) begins in the year 2020 for the US Presidential Election 2020, the election will be deemed to have taken place for the purposes of this market. We will then settle the market as per our rules regardless of whether the election process is fully completed in 2020 or beyond."
This is the bit you should be aware of, from the next President market.
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
This market will be void if an election does not take place in 2020. If more than one election takes place in 2020, then this market will apply to the first election that is held.
10/03/2020 10:30am – Once voting (whether postal, electronic or at the ballot box) begins in the year 2020 for the US Presidential Election 2020, the election will be deemed to have taken place for the purposes of this market. We will then settle the market as per our rules regardless of whether the election process is fully completed in 2020 or beyond.
If there is any material change to the established role or any ambiguity as to who occupies the position, then Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled.
Betfair expressly reserves the right to suspend and/or void any and all bets on this market at any time if Betfair is not satisfied (in its absolute discretion) with the certainty of the outcome.
So there is, in reality, no reason at all for voiding the market.
Indeed, plenty of us having been building up our betting portfolios for nearly four years.
Except that because postal voting has started, it is not clear how and even whether Trump votes transfer to Pence if Trump drops out. We could end up with Trump 20%, Pence 35% and Biden 45% leading to President Pence being inaugurated but Betfair settling on Biden even though he has lost, because he has most named ECVs. This would be an unsustainable and highly controversial mess.
I may be missing something but I think they obviously transfer, assuming Trump supports Pence? They're selecting Trump/Pence-supporting electors, the electors would be the same even if there was no Trump.
Yes and who knows? Yes, ECVs would automatically transfer so Pence would become President. Whether they transfer for Betfair settlement purposes is less clear. For some weeks now, since I started to draw attention to the Biden and sometimes Trump risk premiums, I've taken the view that I really have no idea which way Betfair would jump.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
If Trump resigns/is incacipated/dies, and still wins the election, Pence becomes president, under one of the amendments (someone quoted which one, above)
But that would be under the 25th Amendment, Betfair will only pay out on those who become President via the 12th Amendment.
No, they say they'll pay out when it becomes clear who has the EVs. If Trump is gone before the election, it will be clear that all of 'his' electors will pledge instead for Pence so if Trump/Pence wins a majority of EVs then it's clear that Pence continues as the president.
These would not be faithless electors, as described in the Betfair rules.
I don't see how BF wouldn't pay on Pence in this scenario.
Because in several states the electoral college voters are required by law to vote for the person who won the state, even if that person is dead.
'There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.'
I've been banging on for ages that is has the potential to get very messy.
Are you saying that if Trump dies on 31st October (spooky) and the Republicans win the election with 275 ECV. Then some Republican Electroral Collegiates will vote Trump, some others will vote Pence and Biden will have the most votes with 263 ECV?
That would just be stupid.
There's the potential for that, and yes it would be stupid, but this is 2020.
We're in unprecedented times, with several states with different laws, and an even number of Justices on the Supreme Court, in the event of a tie there, the decision of the lower court is upheld.
Most votes doesn't win, you need a majority in the EC.
No majority and its thrown to the house.
But again, there's zero chance Pence wouldn't remain president if trump/pence got 270 (with no shenanigans, obviously)
Am I the only PBer who thinks Trump having covid will make no difference to the race?
No I agree with you. Most likely scenario is that he is fine. The reaction to the news this morning shows the level of fear over this virus, even when it is just a positive test result. Could develop into something serious sure, but probably won`t.
Please can we spare a moment to think about the Coronavirus. Out there is a virus that has found itself inside Donald Trump. How lost and confused it must be right now. Could it exchange DNA and mutate into a more right wing and populist version of itself? Scary times. The last thing we need is a Trump Corona Hybrid..
You are misreading the situation. The virus cells in Trump are wildly happy and will be having a big party. The Virus has just levelled up. Stage 2 of the mission has been accomplished as set by the bio-warfare laboratories in China 12 months ago.
Why? California was a non-slavery State which only joined the USA in 1850.
But slavery was practiced in California post 1850 (and as well prior to 1850.)
Was it? I did not know that. What on earth then did it mean to be a non-slavery State?
Slavery was (originally) supposed to be up to the individual States - down to the laws in that state supporting it or not. This is what the original meaning of States Rights was largely about. A Slave State had laws backing slavery. A Non Slave State didn't.
In practise, slaves were often bought into non-slave states and back again. Which in time, led to Dredd Scott et al.
The cause of the US civil war boiled down to this
- The non-slave states really, really didn't want slavery - The South was demanding and getting more and more Federal law defending slavery - catching runaways etc. - Dredd Scott decision came close to enforcing slavery in non-slave states - The North didn't want to move against slavery (mostly). The moderates, such as Lincoln, thought that slavery was on the way out, and that if they tried to abolish slavery the result would be a civil war, which the South might win. And thus entrench slavery. - The hardliners in the South saw mass emigration as threat - the North could rapidly create whole states of anti-slavery sentiment. As opposed to Southerners expanding slavery. Cotton killed the soil - pre fertilisers - so new land was always needed for slavery. - The election of Lincoln presaged the point where the expanding North was seen to be taking over the Federal government. - Which meant no more protection of slavery at the Federal level. Slavery would be overwhelmed, gradually. Southerners assumed that using immigration, the mid west would be carved into dozens of small states, anti-slavery and populous. Among other things, this is why Texas (a slave state) had the option to split in smaller states - as a future plan to balance against the North.
Assuming Trump recovers by the end of his quarantine (a medium sized assumption given his age and physical health) or shortly after the net effect on this election will surely be zero? If he's out and about again by 15 Oct there are still nearly three weeks to go before the election. The theories I have seen that this helps Trump are -
(1) a sympathy vote if he is seriously ill for a period prior to his recovery; or (2) if he recovers quickly, or is asymptomatic, he shows how tough he is and gets the "strong man" vote.
The multitiple problems with above hypothesis (1) are that (a) people (especially not Americans) don't vote out of sympathy (b) a very ill President will tank the Dow and every other stock index you can imagine, and (c) getting very ill counters the very message that he and the Republican party have been putting forward for months that C-19 is nothing to worry about and the country should fully reopen. There is also (d) that Trump has never presented himself as a symathetic character, quite deliberately, his constant disdain for "losers" etc. and it will take a lot to change that,
The obvious problem with hypothesis (2) is that Trump is already the "strong man" candidate, that's priced in, no-one considering voting for Biden appears to do so because they consider him to be a stronger man (save perhaps in a moral sense) than Trump.
A variable might be the Dems alienating the voters with unsympathetic messaging. But I'm not sure about even that.
Clearly if the virus incapcitates Trump or worse then (almost literally) off. But if he comes out of quarantine unscathed in 2 weeks (which is still 2 weeks before the election) then this doesn't change any of the fundamental dynamics. The most striking of those to me is that the Trafalgar Group now has him down in both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Edit - WIsconsin for Wyoming. Any reputable poll that put biden ahead in Wyoming would effectively call the election. Sorry!
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
If Trump resigns/is incacipated/dies, and still wins the election, Pence becomes president, under one of the amendments (someone quoted which one, above)
But that would be under the 25th Amendment, Betfair will only pay out on those who become President via the 12th Amendment.
No, they say they'll pay out when it becomes clear who has the EVs. If Trump is gone before the election, it will be clear that all of 'his' electors will pledge instead for Pence so if Trump/Pence wins a majority of EVs then it's clear that Pence continues as the president.
These would not be faithless electors, as described in the Betfair rules.
I don't see how BF wouldn't pay on Pence in this scenario.
Because in several states the electoral college voters are required by law to vote for the person who won the state, even if that person is dead.
'There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.'
I've been banging on for ages that is has the potential to get very messy.
Are you saying that if Trump dies on 31st October (spooky) and the Republicans win the election with 275 ECV. Then some Republican Electroral Collegiates will vote Trump, some others will vote Pence and Biden will have the most votes with 263 ECV?
That would just be stupid.
A plurality of EVs wouldn't make Biden President, though. Absence of a majority means the incoming House of Representatives would choose in a contingent election, voting as state blocs (so not necessarily the party with an absolute House majority).
It would be a messy situation, certainly, particularly if Biden had won the popular vote (if the Trump/Pence ticket had won the popular vote as well as the electoral vote, I think in practice the House would seat Pence).
Am I the only PBer who thinks Trump having covid will make no difference to the race?
I think it is likely to make no difference, but we won't know. Perhaps Biden wins with a 5% margin and it appears testing positive had no impact, but had Trump stayed Corona Free, he would have scrambled enough back to hold on to PA and the 270 ECV. All such analysis will just be based on counterfactual.
Agreed. It’s the ‘which route is quicker in this traffic? paradox’. You never get to find out.
But, I think on this morning’s evidence, PB is in danger of going down the Trumpton Getting Covid 19 Is Good For Trumpton route.
People who have never owned slaves paying money to people who have never been slaves because of slavery centuries ago is indefensibly stupid.
Not really, I don't think. I am against it but I don't see that it is insanely wrong unless you don't believe in national identity at all. I do; for instance I think the Act of Union applies to present day E and S, not that it doesn't apply because it was enacted by a lot of old twats in wigs who have been dead for centuries. If you believe that you are just left with statute of limitations points which tend to have low-level procedural justifications about evidential problems, requirement for certainty etc.
Of course most English people who contend for reparations don't think the English were responsible for the slave trade, they think the English TORIES were.
How many people who have been in contact with Trump now have to self-isolate? (Biden? GOP leaders?)
and related:
Is there any way in which Trump's Covid announcement affects the SCOTUS nomination?
Someone thinks it will because Betfair's SCOTUS new justice confirmation date market has seen the middle (election to inauguration) window cut from 8 to 2 overnight.
Actuarial risk is part of gambling and something I've been factoring into my strategy.
I guess there’s at least a possibility of insider betting for a few days, so a shortish suspension isn’t entirely unreasonable.
Voiding the market would be. Though I have to acknowledge I’m not disinterested in the question.
The whole point of peer to peer betting is insider betting.
That is the purpose of the market. It should not need to be suspended.
If the whole point of peer to peer is 'insider' betting it would seem there is little point in anyone apart from an insider dealing in it as it would essentially be free money at the expense of mugs?
Yes.
Just as in poker if you don't know who the sucker is then it's you.
It's the reason I've never had any desire to bet on horse racing.
Reminds me of my visit to Happy Valley in 96..... I have never seen racing so obviously crooked.
Pence can't "win", the ballots are already printed.
If Trump resigns/is incacipated/dies, and still wins the election, Pence becomes president, under one of the amendments (someone quoted which one, above)
But that would be under the 25th Amendment, Betfair will only pay out on those who become President via the 12th Amendment.
No, they say they'll pay out when it becomes clear who has the EVs. If Trump is gone before the election, it will be clear that all of 'his' electors will pledge instead for Pence so if Trump/Pence wins a majority of EVs then it's clear that Pence continues as the president.
These would not be faithless electors, as described in the Betfair rules.
I don't see how BF wouldn't pay on Pence in this scenario.
Because in several states the electoral college voters are required by law to vote for the person who won the state, even if that person is dead.
'There are 33 states (plus the District of Columbia) that require electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Most of those states (16 plus DC) nonetheless do not provide for any penalty or any mechanism to prevent the deviant vote from counting as cast. Five states provide a penalty of some sort for a deviant vote, and 14 states provide for the vote to be canceled and the elector replaced (two states do both). The constitutionality of these laws was upheld by the Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington on July 6, 2020.'
I've been banging on for ages that is has the potential to get very messy.
Are you saying that if Trump dies on 31st October (spooky) and the Republicans win the election with 275 ECV. Then some Republican Electroral Collegiates will vote Trump, some others will vote Pence and Biden will have the most votes with 263 ECV?
That would just be stupid.
There was the case of Mel Carnahan who died in a plane crash while running for senate:
Lieutenant Governor Roger B. Wilson ascended to the governorship and served out the balance of Carnahan's term, which ended in January 2001. Because Missouri election law would not allow Carnahan's name to be removed from the November 7, 2000, ballot, the campaign chose Carnahan's widow, Jean Carnahan, to unofficially become the new Democratic candidate. Wilson promised to appoint her to the seat, if it became vacant as a result of Mel Carnahan's win in the election. Carnahan's campaign continued using the slogan "I'm Still with Mel." A Senate first, Carnahan posthumously won, by a 2% margin. Jean Carnahan was then appointed to the Senate and served until November 2002, when she was defeated by a 1% margin in a special election by Republican James Talent.
I'm not sure what would happen at a presidential level
How many people who have been in contact with Trump now have to self-isolate? (Biden? GOP leaders?)
and related:
Is there any way in which Trump's Covid announcement affects the SCOTUS nomination?
Someone thinks it will because Betfair's SCOTUS new justice confirmation date market has seen the middle (election to inauguration) window cut from 8 to 2 overnight.
If she tests positive herself it surely puts a spanner into the works of being grilled by the Senate which must occur before they vote.
Mr. Z, British. The royal union was four centuries ago, the political union three.
I look forward, as a Yorkshireman with some Welsh ancestry too, to paying myself reparations for the actions of the Vikings against the Saxons, and the Saxons against the Celts.
Anyone have the address of the Italian I should ask for reparations for the Romans?
I'm sorry to hear the lovely FLOTUS Melania may be unwell!
FLOTUS and Flatus both things that follow trump around.
One can only hope that after he's booted out of the White House the amazing Melania has him in the divorce courts so fast his (tiny) feet (and hands) don't touch the ground.
How many people who have been in contact with Trump now have to self-isolate? (Biden? GOP leaders?)
and related:
Is there any way in which Trump's Covid announcement affects the SCOTUS nomination?
Someone thinks it will because Betfair's SCOTUS new justice confirmation date market has seen the middle (election to inauguration) window cut from 8 to 2 overnight.
If she tests positive herself it surely puts a spanner into the works of being grilled by the Senate which must occur before they vote.
If she was in the UK she would now be under 14 day quarantine for being in contact with Trump...
Actuarial risk is part of gambling and something I've been factoring into my strategy.
I guess there’s at least a possibility of insider betting for a few days, so a shortish suspension isn’t entirely unreasonable.
Voiding the market would be. Though I have to acknowledge I’m not disinterested in the question.
The whole point of peer to peer betting is insider betting.
That is the purpose of the market. It should not need to be suspended.
If the whole point of peer to peer is 'insider' betting it would seem there is little point in anyone apart from an insider dealing in it as it would essentially be free money at the expense of mugs?
Yes.
Just as in poker if you don't know who the sucker is then it's you.
It's the reason I've never had any desire to bet on horse racing.
Reminds me of my visit to Happy Valley in 96..... I have never seen racing so obviously crooked.
People who have never owned slaves paying money to people who have never been slaves because of slavery centuries ago is indefensibly stupid.
I quite agree. I am against reparations on principle - other than where it is by those responsible to those affected - for this reason. But also because we are so selective.
If there are to be reparations for some slavery, why not reparations for the oppression of Catholics in Britain for the best part of 3 centuries or, indeed, the treatment of Jews by pretty much the whole of Europe and the Middle East for most of the past 200 years etc etc?
It would be much better if practical steps were taken now to remedy current disadvantages suffered by people and communities.
People who have never owned slaves paying money to people who have never been slaves because of slavery centuries ago is indefensibly stupid.
Ethnic groups get stuck outside the mainstream and remain there for generations without help. Back when Christians were not allowed to lend money at interest, Jewish families, barred from owning land and from trade guilds, thus found that money lending was about the only thing they could do legally in England and much of Western Europe. Generations later such family traditions resulted in the most horrific antisemitic tropes with genocidal effects. Similarly, after the Civil War in the US, freed blacks who had worked the land without compensation for generations were not allowed to own any, so they ultimately gravitated to the northern cities in the Great Migration, but found he professions there largely closed to them as well. If the freed slaves had been given the promised 40 acres and a mule there would be a large class of African-American farming families in the South today, changing the picture completely. Levelling the playing field, somehow, works.
I'm not in favour of monetary reparations for the reason that the best known case of reparations, those of the Treaty of Versailles, ended spectacularly badly and similar resentments could brew. But I am in favour of positive discrimination on the grounds similar to that of a golf handicap. You want as level a playing field as possible if people are going to play by the rules. A very large group of of people were not allowed to join the club and play the game for a very long time, so tournament scores should be adjusted accordngly.
Am I completely crazy for not thinking the SNP MP needs to resign, given she can be punished without losing their job as an MP? I might be getting soft.
Why? California was a non-slavery State which only joined the USA in 1850.
But slavery was practiced in California post 1850 (and as well prior to 1850.)
Was it? I did not know that. What on earth then did it mean to be a non-slavery State?
Slavery was (originally) supposed to be up to the individual States - down to the laws in that state supporting it or not. This is what the original meaning of States Rights was largely about. A Slave State had laws backing slavery. A Non Slave State didn't.
In practise, slaves were often bought into non-slave states and back again. Which in time, led to Dredd Scott et al.
The cause of the US civil war boiled down to this
- The non-slave states really, really didn't want slavery - The South was demanding and getting more and more Federal law defending slavery - catching runaways etc. - Dredd Scott decision came close to enforcing slavery in non-slave states - The North didn't want to move against slavery (mostly). The moderates, such as Lincoln, thought that slavery was on the way out, and that if they tried to abolish slavery the result would be a civil war, which the South might win. And thus entrench slavery. - The hardliners in the South saw mass emigration as threat - the North could rapidly create whole states of anti-slavery sentiment. As opposed to Southerners expanding slavery. Cotton killed the soil - pre fertilisers - so new land was always needed for slavery. - The election of Lincoln presaged the point where the expanding North was seen to be taking over the Federal government. - Which meant no more protection of slavery at the Federal level. Slavery would be overwhelmed, gradually. Southerners assumed that using immigration, the mid west would be carved into dozens of small states, anti-slavery and populous. Among other things, this is why Texas (a slave state) had the option to split in smaller states - as a future plan to balance against the North.
Lieutenant Governor Roger B. Wilson ascended to the governorship and served out the balance of Carnahan's term, which ended in January 2001. Because Missouri election law would not allow Carnahan's name to be removed from the November 7, 2000, ballot, the campaign chose Carnahan's widow, Jean Carnahan, to unofficially become the new Democratic candidate. Wilson promised to appoint her to the seat, if it became vacant as a result of Mel Carnahan's win in the election. Carnahan's campaign continued using the slogan "I'm Still with Mel." A Senate first, Carnahan posthumously won, by a 2% margin. Jean Carnahan was then appointed to the Senate and served until November 2002, when she was defeated by a 1% margin in a special election by Republican James Talent.
I'm not sure what would happen at a presidential level
It means gawky monosomic man child Barron gets to be POTUS.
Am I completely crazy for not thinking the SNP MP needs to resign, given she can be punished without losing their job as an MP? I might be getting soft.
She has to go.
The level of misjudgement is so catastrophic that it shatters all trust in her - both from her coleagues and her constituents.
The SNP portion of my twitter feed is basically a unanimous "Margaret Ferrier is a superb activist and campaigner who's made real differences on a number of issue but her position is totally untenable and she must resign"
Actuarial risk is part of gambling and something I've been factoring into my strategy.
I guess there’s at least a possibility of insider betting for a few days, so a shortish suspension isn’t entirely unreasonable.
Voiding the market would be. Though I have to acknowledge I’m not disinterested in the question.
The whole point of peer to peer betting is insider betting.
That is the purpose of the market. It should not need to be suspended.
If the whole point of peer to peer is 'insider' betting it would seem there is little point in anyone apart from an insider dealing in it as it would essentially be free money at the expense of mugs?
Yes.
Just as in poker if you don't know who the sucker is then it's you.
It's the reason I've never had any desire to bet on horse racing.
Reminds me of my visit to Happy Valley in 96..... I have never seen racing so obviously crooked.
As is trotting i think
At Happy Valley, the favourite in a couple of races, was in front. In both races, the jockey looked behind and pulled his mount back. Not quite pulled up and stopped for a drink at the bar, but close.
I was told that the betting was washing machine for Triad money - payoffs were done by making bets that would lose.
People who have never owned slaves paying money to people who have never been slaves because of slavery centuries ago is indefensibly stupid.
I quite agree. I am against reparations on principle - other than where it is by those responsible to those affected - for this reason. But also because we are so selective.
If there are to be reparations for some slavery, why not reparations for the oppression of Catholics in Britain for the best part of 3 centuries or, indeed, the treatment of Jews by pretty much the whole of Europe and the Middle East for most of the past 200 years etc etc?
It would be much better if practical steps were taken now to remedy current disadvantages suffered by people and communities.
Which, whether you agree with them or not, is supposedly the point of the US reparations.
Mr. rkrkrk, aye, although that's a slightly one-sided take on the correct decision to abolish slavery even though it was contrary to economic interests.
Also, if ancestry has to be proven doesn't it also have to be proven one is descended from slave owners to be liable for this mad reparations idea?
Holding people today responsible for the actions of the distant past is insane. It's difficult enough getting back to let go of grudges, let alone fostering them deliberately.
Are Irish and Chinese immigrants, often badly treated in early America, going to get any cash? What about the Jews, persecuted under John and Edward I (as well as more obvious occasions elsewhere)?
The Harrowing of the North was responsible for the deaths of 75% of Yorkshiremen. Where's the money for that?
There's enough rancour, bitterness, and division without letting the current woke fixation on racial segregation, fetishising victimhood, and promoting polarisation make it even worse.
You want the far right to rise? You want whiteness to become a political identity? That'll happen if whiteness is used as a stick to beat people with. Indulging these dumb, far left racial identity politics fans is the perfect way to piss off a lot of ordinary people, and if the mainstream political class doesn't understand that they'll end up with a popular disconnect akin to the EU situation but far worse.
The level of misjudgement is so catastrophic that it shatters all trust in her - both from her coleagues and her constituents.
The SNP portion of my twitter feed is basically a unanimous "Margaret Ferrier is a superb activist and campaigner who's made real differences on a number of issue but her position is totally untenable and she must resign"
Other than recall, which may happen, there is no way to compel her to resign.
I did see someone note that this is the best job she has any hope of getting, so why not milk the salary for another 3 years?
Mr. Z, British. The royal union was four centuries ago, the political union three.
I look forward, as a Yorkshireman with some Welsh ancestry too, to paying myself reparations for the actions of the Vikings against the Saxons, and the Saxons against the Celts.
Anyone have the address of the Italian I should ask for reparations for the Romans?
Yes, I know all that, but I have encountered no Scottish Welsh or NI reparation enthusiasts.
I would suggest that the average black American still feels every day the consequences of what was done to his ancestors, whereas I hope you are over the worst of the outrages you refer to.
Republican candidate Kevin O'Connor doing better in the Massachusetts Senate race than any Republican candidate in the state since Scott Brown in 2010 and 2012, clearly a few Kennedy voters voting for him rather than Democratic incumbent Ed Markey
Interesting question is whether Trump got infected by Hope Hicks - in which case he was very unlikely to have been infectious at the time of the debate - or from a common source which infected both of them. If that were the case, then the risk to Biden from exposure during the debate, while fairly low, is non zero.
Mr. rkrkrk, aye, although that's a slightly one-sided take on the correct decision to abolish slavery even though it was contrary to economic interests.
Also, if ancestry has to be proven doesn't it also have to be proven one is descended from slave owners to be liable for this mad reparations idea?
Holding people today responsible for the actions of the distant past is insane. It's difficult enough getting back to let go of grudges, let alone fostering them deliberately.
Are Irish and Chinese immigrants, often badly treated in early America, going to get any cash? What about the Jews, persecuted under John and Edward I (as well as more obvious occasions elsewhere)?
The Harrowing of the North was responsible for the deaths of 75% of Yorkshiremen. Where's the money for that?
There's enough rancour, bitterness, and division without letting the current woke fixation on racial segregation, fetishising victimhood, and promoting polarisation make it even worse.
You want the far right to rise? You want whiteness to become a political identity? That'll happen if whiteness is used as a stick to beat people with. Indulging these dumb, far left racial identity politics fans is the perfect way to piss off a lot of ordinary people, and if the mainstream political class doesn't understand that they'll end up with a popular disconnect akin to the EU situation but far worse.
Worth looking into is all I'm saying.
You've obviously decided that, despite not knowing what is proposed, you're irrevocably opposed.
As i understand it, there are a range of options on the table, including increased govt investment in poorer areas.
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Republican candidate Kevin O'Connor doing better in the Massachusetts Senate race than any Republican candidate in the state since Scott Brown in 2010, clearly a few Kennedy voters voting for him rather than Democratic incumbent Ed Markey
A sizable proviso that this is an internal poll conducted on behalf of the GOP campaign.
Campaigns don't release polls that show them absolutely miles behind (or ahead) and for the Republican to release this one (which still shows him quite a long way back) suggests 10% really is towards the peak of what he can hope to achieve.
To be honest, although Markey will be a little bruised by the primary, I'd be surprised in practice to see him win by less than 15%.
Sorry if I'm being really dumb - but what does housing decreases mean in practice? The houses that are there now are presumably not going to be knocked down!?
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Biden would likely beat Pence, however Pence would beat Harris in my view, she has zero appeal to the rustbelt unlike Biden and she is no Obama for the black community either
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Mr. rkrkrk, spending more on deprived areas is a separate discussion from reparations. Unless you intend only to spend on black areas and not white areas.
And yes, I've decided I'm irrevocably opposed to holding people responsible for things they haven't done.
Mr. xP, that's quite the surprise given how they struggled for so long and now have competitive engines. But who'd supply Red Bull? Can't see Mercedes or Ferrari being keen and they've burnt some of the bridge, at least, with Renault.
Sorry if I'm being really dumb - but what does housing decreases mean in practice? The houses that are there now are presumably not going to be knocked down!?
Change in the requirement I think. So fewer new houses built.
Last thing I wanted to hear. It was almost done and this now muddies the waters in a number of respects. It could work 2 ways to Trump's benefit - with (i) being Plan A and (ii) being the Plan B Insurance.
(i) Grabs ALL the spotlight, upends the narrative, makes it hard to attack him, gains sympathy, feigns empathy, polls move in his favour, emerges fighting fit for a rousing last 2 weeks, closes closes, pulls off a narrow win on 3/11.
(ii) As above but the polls do NOT move for him. Move further against him even. He pulls out through illness to save face.
The election was gone, he was on for a loss of potentially humiliating proportions, and he knew it. With his psychology such a humbling experience would be intolerable - perhaps literally so - and both (i) and (ii) avoids it.
So I am skeptical about this positive test. No more than that, things are usually as they appear to be, and why wouldn't he catch it, it does make sense, but I have a 25% suspicion that it is yet another in his long list of mendacious stunts.
People who have never owned slaves paying money to people who have never been slaves because of slavery centuries ago is indefensibly stupid.
I quite agree. I am against reparations on principle - other than where it is by those responsible to those affected - for this reason. But also because we are so selective.
If there are to be reparations for some slavery, why not reparations for the oppression of Catholics in Britain for the best part of 3 centuries or, indeed, the treatment of Jews by pretty much the whole of Europe and the Middle East for most of the past 200 years etc etc?
It would be much better if practical steps were taken now to remedy current disadvantages suffered by people and communities.
Which, whether you agree with them or not, is supposedly the point of the US reparations.
Helping the disadvantaged now is one thing. But it needs to be to all those disadvantaged now not to one group only. Fairness is key.
One thing the US could do now is to remove the barriers to blacks voting. The various steps taken are almost as bad as the earlier Jim Crow laws. This documentary is very good on this - it is quite appalling what is being done. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000l8dv - The Crisis in American Democracy.
Last thing I wanted to hear. It was almost done and this now muddies the waters in a number of respects. It could work 2 ways to Trump's benefit - with (i) being Plan A and (ii) being the Plan B Insurance.
(i) Grabs ALL the spotlight, upends the narrative, makes it hard to attack him, gains sympathy, feigns empathy, polls move in his favour, emerges fighting fit for a rousing last 2 weeks, closes closes, pulls off a narrow win on 3/11.
(ii) As above but the polls do NOT move for him. Move further against him even. He pulls out through illness to save face.
The election was gone, he was on for a loss of potentially humiliating proportions, and he knew it. With his psychology such a humbling experience would be intolerable - perhaps literally so - and both (i) and (ii) avoids it.
So I am skeptical about this positive test. No more than that, things are usually as they appear to be, and why wouldn't he catch it, it does make sense, but I have a 25% suspicion that it is yet another in his long list of mendacious stunts.
Mr. rkrkrk, aye, although that's a slightly one-sided take on the correct decision to abolish slavery even though it was contrary to economic interests.
Also, if ancestry has to be proven doesn't it also have to be proven one is descended from slave owners to be liable for this mad reparations idea?
Holding people today responsible for the actions of the distant past is insane. It's difficult enough getting back to let go of grudges, let alone fostering them deliberately.
Are Irish and Chinese immigrants, often badly treated in early America, going to get any cash? What about the Jews, persecuted under John and Edward I (as well as more obvious occasions elsewhere)?
The Harrowing of the North was responsible for the deaths of 75% of Yorkshiremen. Where's the money for that?
There's enough rancour, bitterness, and division without letting the current woke fixation on racial segregation, fetishising victimhood, and promoting polarisation make it even worse.
You want the far right to rise? You want whiteness to become a political identity? That'll happen if whiteness is used as a stick to beat people with. Indulging these dumb, far left racial identity politics fans is the perfect way to piss off a lot of ordinary people, and if the mainstream political class doesn't understand that they'll end up with a popular disconnect akin to the EU situation but far worse.
If you go back far enough I imagine it's a virtual certainty that we're all descended somehow from slave owners, and for that matter from slaves.
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Biden would likely beat Pence, however Pence would beat Harris in my view, she has zero appeal to the rustbelt unlike Biden and she is no Obama for the black community either
Good comment
So my black swan (i.e. possible but unlikely) is that Biden also tests positve and is too ill to go on. Then Pence versus Harris and Pence wins.
So my revised most likely scenario is that Trump pulls out (know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em) so Pence versus Biden and Biden wins.
Mr. rkrkrk, spending more on deprived areas is a separate discussion from reparations. Unless you intend only to spend on black areas and not white areas.
And yes, I've decided I'm irrevocably opposed to holding people responsible for things they haven't done.
Mr. xP, that's quite the surprise given how they struggled for so long and now have competitive engines. But who'd supply Red Bull? Can't see Mercedes or Ferrari being keen and they've burnt some of the bridge, at least, with Renault.
Stefano Domenicali is going to have to do a lot of arm twisting but I suspect we will see Red Bull selling one of the teams and one getting a Renault engine and the other a.n.other.
Wasn't there talk a little while back of Mercedes selling the F1 team to Ineos. If that occurs it wouldn't surprise me to see Ineos Mercedes v Red Bull Mercedes v Mclaren Mercedes at the front of the grid.
Mr. Z, British. The royal union was four centuries ago, the political union three.
I look forward, as a Yorkshireman with some Welsh ancestry too, to paying myself reparations for the actions of the Vikings against the Saxons, and the Saxons against the Celts.
Anyone have the address of the Italian I should ask for reparations for the Romans?
The Saxons v Celts thing is a curious one. Linguistic evidence, the absence of Celtic place names, does point to a genocide. The problem is there is very little other evidence. In London the archaelogical record of Boudicia's burning of the city in 61CE is very clear with a level of burned ash. There is no similar record of a Saxon Invasion, when one would expect the Romano-Britons to have put up a fight. They just seem to have moved out while the Saxons build a new settlement, Lundenwic, outside the walls where Aldwich is now. At around the same time that Lundenwic was being settled a pocket of Roman Civilization actually continued around St Martin-in-the-Fields, half a mile away, until presumably the two merged. When Alfred told the Saxons to move back within the Roman Walls in 886, Lundenwic was, to them after 3 centuries, the "old town" or the "Aldwich".
Similarly, the city where I have a little first hand knowledge of the archaeology, Canterbury, appears to have been gradually abandoned from the date of the Roman departure for a century or so, except for a few farmers and gradually decayed. Juteish refugees appear to have arrived in that time and intermarried with the locals, so it even kept part of its name, Durovernum Cantiacorum to Canterbury.
So my preferred theory is that the Anglo-Saxons and Jutes rocked up and moved into the governmental and cultural vaccuum left by the collapse of Roman civilisation. To get anywhere the Celts had to adopt their language and customs, and were effectively assimilated to create, eventually what is today England.
Landmark Communications have a decent reputation but do lean Democrat, so some scepticism is in order. Otoh, it is a big shift from their previous poll a month ago, which had the President seven ahead.
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
Biden would likely beat Pence, however Pence would beat Harris in my view, she has zero appeal to the rustbelt unlike Biden and she is no Obama for the black community either
Harris is the only one of the four people on the tickets this year with a net positive favourable rating.
And Pence's pull in the rust belt isn't great either. What he has is purely as a result of association with Trump. He is very low on charisma and, while Trump supporters wouldn't flock to Harris by any means, there is a very good chance a good number of them just wouldn't bother voting if their man wasn't an option.
Comments
I suspect IBAS are going to be kept busy like they were with the Theresa May exit market fiasco.
That would just be stupid.
We're in unprecedented times, with several states with different laws, and an even number of Justices on the Supreme Court, in the event of a tie there, the decision of the lower court is upheld.
Imagine your reasonable worst case scenario: because that is what will happen
I can’t work out whether this news proves it, or refutes it
No majority and its thrown to the house.
But again, there's zero chance Pence wouldn't remain president if trump/pence got 270 (with no shenanigans, obviously)
In practise, slaves were often bought into non-slave states and back again. Which in time, led to Dredd Scott et al.
The cause of the US civil war boiled down to this
- The non-slave states really, really didn't want slavery
- The South was demanding and getting more and more Federal law defending slavery - catching runaways etc.
- Dredd Scott decision came close to enforcing slavery in non-slave states
- The North didn't want to move against slavery (mostly). The moderates, such as Lincoln, thought that slavery was on the way out, and that if they tried to abolish slavery the result would be a civil war, which the South might win. And thus entrench slavery.
- The hardliners in the South saw mass emigration as threat - the North could rapidly create whole states of anti-slavery sentiment. As opposed to Southerners expanding slavery. Cotton killed the soil - pre fertilisers - so new land was always needed for slavery.
- The election of Lincoln presaged the point where the expanding North was seen to be taking over the Federal government.
- Which meant no more protection of slavery at the Federal level. Slavery would be overwhelmed, gradually. Southerners assumed that using immigration, the mid west would be carved into dozens of small states, anti-slavery and populous. Among other things, this is why Texas (a slave state) had the option to split in smaller states - as a future plan to balance against the North.
(1) a sympathy vote if he is seriously ill for a period prior to his recovery; or
(2) if he recovers quickly, or is asymptomatic, he shows how tough he is and gets the "strong man" vote.
The multitiple problems with above hypothesis (1) are that (a) people (especially not Americans) don't vote out of sympathy (b) a very ill President will tank the Dow and every other stock index you can imagine, and (c) getting very ill counters the very message that he and the Republican party have been putting forward for months that C-19 is nothing to worry about and the country should fully reopen. There is also (d) that Trump has never presented himself as a symathetic character, quite deliberately, his constant disdain for "losers" etc. and it will take a lot to change that,
The obvious problem with hypothesis (2) is that Trump is already the "strong man" candidate, that's priced in, no-one considering voting for Biden appears to do so because they consider him to be a stronger man (save perhaps in a moral sense) than Trump.
A variable might be the Dems alienating the voters with unsympathetic messaging. But I'm not sure about even that.
Clearly if the virus incapcitates Trump or worse then (almost literally) off. But if he comes out of quarantine unscathed in 2 weeks (which is still 2 weeks before the election) then this doesn't change any of the fundamental dynamics. The most striking of those to me is that the Trafalgar Group now has him down in both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Edit - WIsconsin for Wyoming. Any reputable poll that put biden ahead in Wyoming would effectively call the election. Sorry!
It would be a messy situation, certainly, particularly if Biden had won the popular vote (if the Trump/Pence ticket had won the popular vote as well as the electoral vote, I think in practice the House would seat Pence).
But, I think on this morning’s evidence, PB is in danger of going down the Trumpton Getting Covid 19 Is Good For Trumpton route.
https://twitter.com/brianroemmele/status/1302210213181714433?s=21
Of course most English people who contend for reparations don't think the English were responsible for the slave trade, they think the English TORIES were.
Lieutenant Governor Roger B. Wilson ascended to the governorship and served out the balance of Carnahan's term, which ended in January 2001. Because Missouri election law would not allow Carnahan's name to be removed from the November 7, 2000, ballot, the campaign chose Carnahan's widow, Jean Carnahan, to unofficially become the new Democratic candidate. Wilson promised to appoint her to the seat, if it became vacant as a result of Mel Carnahan's win in the election. Carnahan's campaign continued using the slogan "I'm Still with Mel." A Senate first, Carnahan posthumously won, by a 2% margin. Jean Carnahan was then appointed to the Senate and served until November 2002, when she was defeated by a 1% margin in a special election by Republican James Talent.
I'm not sure what would happen at a presidential level
I look forward, as a Yorkshireman with some Welsh ancestry too, to paying myself reparations for the actions of the Vikings against the Saxons, and the Saxons against the Celts.
Anyone have the address of the Italian I should ask for reparations for the Romans?
I recently found out the UK borrowed to pay off slave owners and only finished debt payments in 2015.
If there are to be reparations for some slavery, why not reparations for the oppression of Catholics in Britain for the best part of 3 centuries or, indeed, the treatment of Jews by pretty much the whole of Europe and the Middle East for most of the past 200 years etc etc?
It would be much better if practical steps were taken now to remedy current disadvantages suffered by people and communities.
I'm not in favour of monetary reparations for the reason that the best known case of reparations, those of the Treaty of Versailles, ended spectacularly badly and similar resentments could brew. But I am in favour of positive discrimination on the grounds similar to that of a golf handicap. You want as level a playing field as possible if people are going to play by the rules. A very large group of of people were not allowed to join the club and play the game for a very long time, so tournament scores should be adjusted accordngly.
Al Trump Specials and all Presidential Bets are suspended as is state betting.
Supreme Court Nom date is still open and seen some big price movements
Senate and Congressional bets are still open.
The level of misjudgement is so catastrophic that it shatters all trust in her - both from her coleagues and her constituents.
The SNP portion of my twitter feed is basically a unanimous "Margaret Ferrier is a superb activist and campaigner who's made real differences on a number of issue but her position is totally untenable and she must resign"
I was told that the betting was washing machine for Triad money - payoffs were done by making bets that would lose.
Also, if ancestry has to be proven doesn't it also have to be proven one is descended from slave owners to be liable for this mad reparations idea?
Holding people today responsible for the actions of the distant past is insane. It's difficult enough getting back to let go of grudges, let alone fostering them deliberately.
Are Irish and Chinese immigrants, often badly treated in early America, going to get any cash? What about the Jews, persecuted under John and Edward I (as well as more obvious occasions elsewhere)?
The Harrowing of the North was responsible for the deaths of 75% of Yorkshiremen. Where's the money for that?
There's enough rancour, bitterness, and division without letting the current woke fixation on racial segregation, fetishising victimhood, and promoting polarisation make it even worse.
You want the far right to rise? You want whiteness to become a political identity? That'll happen if whiteness is used as a stick to beat people with. Indulging these dumb, far left racial identity politics fans is the perfect way to piss off a lot of ordinary people, and if the mainstream political class doesn't understand that they'll end up with a popular disconnect akin to the EU situation but far worse.
I did see someone note that this is the best job she has any hope of getting, so why not milk the salary for another 3 years?
I would suggest that the average black American still feels every day the consequences of what was done to his ancestors, whereas I hope you are over the worst of the outrages you refer to.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1311887684911144961?s=20
If that were the case, then the risk to Biden from exposure during the debate, while fairly low, is non zero.
You've obviously decided that, despite not knowing what is proposed, you're irrevocably opposed.
As i understand it, there are a range of options on the table, including increased govt investment in poorer areas.
We could call it levelling up perhaps
Trump makes a full recovery and is soundly thrashed in the election
What I predict:
Trump makes a partial recovery and takes the opportunity to stand down as president - in order to avoid a humiliating defeat. "I would have won bigly". So Pence versus Biden. An even match I think.
A black Swan:
Biden also steps down because he tests positive or because he realises that his appeal is that he is not Trump and would lose against Pence. So Pence versus Harris. Harris edges it I think.
https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1311923834614882304?s=20
Have they been living under a rock for the past decade or something.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2020/10/02/honda-to-quit-f1/
Empty virtue signalling as always.
Campaigns don't release polls that show them absolutely miles behind (or ahead) and for the Republican to release this one (which still shows him quite a long way back) suggests 10% really is towards the peak of what he can hope to achieve.
To be honest, although Markey will be a little bruised by the primary, I'd be surprised in practice to see him win by less than 15%.
The houses that are there now are presumably not going to be knocked down!?
And yes, I've decided I'm irrevocably opposed to holding people responsible for things they haven't done.
Mr. xP, that's quite the surprise given how they struggled for so long and now have competitive engines. But who'd supply Red Bull? Can't see Mercedes or Ferrari being keen and they've burnt some of the bridge, at least, with Renault.
Last thing I wanted to hear. It was almost done and this now muddies the waters in a number of respects. It could work 2 ways to Trump's benefit - with (i) being Plan A and (ii) being the Plan B Insurance.
(i) Grabs ALL the spotlight, upends the narrative, makes it hard to attack him, gains sympathy, feigns empathy, polls move in his favour, emerges fighting fit for a rousing last 2 weeks, closes closes, pulls off a narrow win on 3/11.
(ii) As above but the polls do NOT move for him. Move further against him even. He pulls out through illness to save face.
The election was gone, he was on for a loss of potentially humiliating proportions, and he knew it. With his psychology such a humbling experience would be intolerable - perhaps literally so - and both (i) and (ii) avoids it.
So I am skeptical about this positive test. No more than that, things are usually as they appear to be, and why wouldn't he catch it, it does make sense, but I have a 25% suspicion that it is yet another in his long list of mendacious stunts.
One thing the US could do now is to remove the barriers to blacks voting. The various steps taken are almost as bad as the earlier Jim Crow laws. This documentary is very good on this - it is quite appalling what is being done.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000l8dv - The Crisis in American Democracy.
So my black swan (i.e. possible but unlikely) is that Biden also tests positve and is too ill to go on. Then Pence versus Harris and Pence wins.
So my revised most likely scenario is that Trump pulls out (know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em) so Pence versus Biden and Biden wins.
🤦🏻♂️
Wasn't there talk a little while back of Mercedes selling the F1 team to Ineos. If that occurs it wouldn't surprise me to see Ineos Mercedes v Red Bull Mercedes v Mclaren Mercedes at the front of the grid.
https://twitter.com/Independent/status/1311957624603242496?s=20
Similarly, the city where I have a little first hand knowledge of the archaeology, Canterbury, appears to have been gradually abandoned from the date of the Roman departure for a century or so, except for a few farmers and gradually decayed. Juteish refugees appear to have arrived in that time and intermarried with the locals, so it even kept part of its name, Durovernum Cantiacorum to Canterbury.
So my preferred theory is that the Anglo-Saxons and Jutes rocked up and moved into the governmental and cultural vaccuum left by the collapse of Roman civilisation. To get anywhere the Celts had to adopt their language and customs, and were effectively assimilated to create, eventually what is today England.
https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/following-rocky-debate-biden-takes-lead-over-trump-latest-exclusive-channel-2-poll/LFMKYZZ2C5DVFE3J7HKNK2653U/
Landmark Communications have a decent reputation but do lean Democrat, so some scepticism is in order. Otoh, it is a big shift from their previous poll a month ago, which had the President seven ahead.
Get well soon, Donald.
And Pence's pull in the rust belt isn't great either. What he has is purely as a result of association with Trump. He is very low on charisma and, while Trump supporters wouldn't flock to Harris by any means, there is a very good chance a good number of them just wouldn't bother voting if their man wasn't an option.