CNN: President Donald Trump is being treated at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for Covid-19 and has begun receiving an anti-viral drug, his doctor announced Friday night.
He sent a tweet late Friday night, his first communication from the hospital, saying, "Going welI, I think! Thank you to all. LOVE!!!"
His upbeat attitude did not reflect the inherent severity of the situation. It remains extremely rare for a president to overnight in hospital, given the extensive medical facilities available at the White House.
Trump himself was said to be spooked after he announced he tested positive early Friday, and has become increasingly alarmed by his diagnosis as he developed symptoms like a fever overnight, according to a person familiar with his reaction.
LOVE!!!
Is there a kind of How the Grinch Stole Christmas conversion in the pipeline?
It's nonsense about medical facilities in the White House. I doubt they are better than those in a well equipped private hospital in England, and every medical professional i have ever met agrees that if you are seriously ill you want to be in the biggest most badass NHS hospital you can find, not private.
Jon Sopel on BBC's News at 10 was stressing the quality and extent of the on-site medical facilities in the White House. Wonder what they do all say, since most, if not everyone, there should be reasonably fit.
However I suspect it's noteworthy that Trump apparently feels fit enough to be on Twitter.
Assuming it’s him.
It's an easy spot. The fake Donald's tweets are not littered with spelling mistakes and grammatical errors.
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
Oh indeed - except this lockdown is not imprisonment - it is early closing for bars/restaurants and some capacity limits! People are just too thick to read the detail.
One other observation - Trump campaign manager is an absolutely cursed position.
Can you imagine taking that job now? You've got no money, you're 7 points behind, your candidate has one foot in the grave, your team is full of looters, an unknown number of your staff have got the plague, your voters are now rightly terrified of getting it when they vote but your candidate already steered them away from voting by post.
And the odds are you’ll end up in prison, or seriously ill.
1) Trump dies, Pence becomes president 2) Pence wants a VP confirmed so that he doesn't pass power to Pelosi if he dies of the rona 3) Dems don't really want Pelosi right before the election, but they'll take Romney as a compromise, Pence nominates him 4) Pence dies too, President Mittens
That doesn't get you there on the Betfair rules, but if Mittens is president already I think it's easy to do the next step of 5) GOP wins (or already won) the Electoral College, the Electoral College finds both people on the ticket are dead and elects the sitting GOP president
Romney has the support of Sen Chuck Hythe and Gov. Cory Dymchurch. A potential running mate in Rep. Ted Marshes.
Unfortunately, since the publication of Kant's first critique, proof by contradiction ain't all it is cracked up to be here. What, he asks and demonstrates to his satisfaction, if one of two propositions appaaretly must be true but they both entail a contradiction?
I have little knowledge of US politics but I do know that Trump is a disaster in every respect, and I hope this is divine intervention and that this sees him out of the race and US politics for good
One other observation - Trump campaign manager is an absolutely cursed position.
Can you imagine taking that job now? You've got no money, you're 7 points behind, your candidate has one foot in the grave, your team is full of looters, an unknown number of your staff have got the plague, your voters are now rightly terrified of getting it when they vote but your candidate already steered them away from voting by post.
And the odds are you’ll end up in prison, or seriously ill.
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
Oh indeed - except this lockdown is not imprisonment - it is early closing for bars/restaurants and some capacity limits! People are just too thick to read the detail.
Yeah, but it was last time and the article makes it clear that people fear that happening again.
Unfortunately, since the publication of Kant's first critique, proof by contradiction ain't all it is cracked up to be here. What, he asks and demonstrates to his satisfaction, if one of two propositions appaaretly must be true but they both entail a contradiction?
When I took classes in formal logic we were told to leave Kant at the door as the lecturer didn't want him 'contaminating any of this'.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Thank you David for setting out the reasons why our parliamentary system is far superior to their presidential system.
Those are symptoms, not reasons. The prime reason is the sheer difficulty of amending the constitution, baked into the constitution, which means that even when problems become glaringly obvious to everyone, it’s very difficult to change the rules to prevent them happening again.
The Constitution has been changed many times in the past. What's impossible is to change it in a partisan manner which sounds like a good idea in general, though is causing some difficulties if one side exploits a defect in a partisan way.
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican, is the current president pro tempore in the Senate. He is 87.
Don’t any of these people ever retire gracefully? They should have a maximum age of 65 to run for office, in the same way they have a minimum age of 35 for the President.
Mr. Sandpit, not a fan of hard age limits (beyond the necessary age of majority).
William Marshal was in his seventies, I think, when he won the Battle of Lincoln and saved England from the French.
Edited extra bit: for that matter, Seleucus and Lysimachus were in their seventies when they contested mastery of the world at the Battle of Corupedium.
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican, is the current president pro tempore in the Senate. He is 87.
Don’t any of these people ever retire gracefully? They should have a maximum age of 65 to run for office, in the same way they have a minimum age of 35 for the President.
I guess this wasn't an issue when the constitution was written.
In short, there would be a ton of uncertainty if we faced such a tragedy as a presidential candidate dying or becoming incapacitated during this period.
Could a Republican legislature—for example, Pennsylvania’s—say that an election with one deceased candidate on the ballot is not really an election where voters have made a choice, and try to appoint electors directly?
God clearly doesn't approve Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court. They had better find another candidate before they are all wiped out.
Which is ironic, because this level of idiocy should really guarantee them all Darwin awards (I know they’ve been suspended for this year).
In some US States they have a coroner's verdict of "suicide by cop". So recklessly wave a Glock out of your bedroom window, get blown away by a SWAT team, equals suicide by cop.
Could the Coney Barrett event be the first cases of suicide by Covid? A similarly reckless act of self-endangerment.as suicide by cop.
Why is BF still suspended? Yesterday we were told it was to take time to void unmatched bets made before the bombshell. This seems to me like telling put option buyers on the stock market that they can reconsider if something dramatic happens. Maybe that is the case. I'm not much of a stock market whiz.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
One thing you can say for the UK (at the moment). We've definitely got our lockdowns the right way round! Nobody from outside London is going to run there to "escape"
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican, is the current president pro tempore in the Senate. He is 87.
Don’t any of these people ever retire gracefully? They should have a maximum age of 65 to run for office, in the same way they have a minimum age of 35 for the President.
Churchill was 66 when he became PM and left office finally in 1955 at 80. Gladstone finished his final term as PM at 84. Reagan was 69 when first elected.
Most PMs and Presidents will be in the age bracket of 40 to 65 when they are in office but that does not mean there are not exceptional cases who can do the job older than that
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
GOP have long since given up on able candidates who would serve the nation rather than their own party's most base interests.
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
The nature of the original Spanish lockdown doesn't exactly help in that respect. Even if London was locked down in isolation (under the rules we had last time) i'm not sure there would necessarily be an enormous exodus. Although maybe it's all a relative thing - and in both cases it's still a relatively small proportion of people.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
GOP have long since given up on able candidates who would serve the nation rather than their own party's most base interests.
It is morally bankrupt.
Romney was nominee less than 10 years ago and was probably the most able nominee from either party for decades
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
1) Trump dies, Pence becomes president 2) Pence wants a VP confirmed so that he doesn't pass power to Pelosi if he dies of the rona 3) Dems don't really want Pelosi right before the election, but they'll take Romney as a compromise, Pence nominates him 4) Pence dies too, President Mittens
That doesn't get you there on the Betfair rules, but if Mittens is president already I think it's easy to do the next step of 5) GOP wins (or already won) the Electoral College, the Electoral College finds both people on the ticket are dead and elects the sitting GOP president
Romney has the support of Sen Chuck Hythe and Gov. Cory Dymchurch. A potential running mate in Rep. Ted Marshes.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
They know what they're doing. They got some good free press for doing it, the GOP got some bad press, they didn't have to worry about walking a bad-taste line and they kept their money to spend on positive ads instead. They can pick up the negative ads again once they have more idea whether the candidate they're currently advertising against is going to be dead by the time the election comes around.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
Maybe, but I can't see that attacking Trump is a good look while he is ill, and would look even worse if he succumbs.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
The GOP is an absolubte disgrace of a party from top to bottom right now
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
This would be my interpretation also.
However, i think Stocky has a point that the way the market is titled is potentially in conflict with the rules.
I think it's worth covering Pence because betfair may not agree with my interpretation.
I do wish i'd bet less on this market and more on Dem/Rep one!
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
They know what they're doing. They got some good free press for doing it, the GOP got some bad press, they didn't have to worry about walking a bad-taste line and they kept their money to spend on positive ads instead. They can pick up the negative ads again once they have more idea whether the candidate they're currently advertising against is going to be dead by the time the election comes around.
Well obviously that's the hope. But that's not to say that the GOP don't know what they're doing either. If Trump gets through this then the next two to three weeks could be crucial. In fact having Trump off the screen doing and saying stupid things for the next few weeks could help him significantly.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
What is the point of challenging for office if one can't challenge your opponent's adminstration in office. Biden is playing the ball not the man, which is a decent compromise.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
What is the point of challenging for office if one can't challenge your opponent's adminstration in office. Biden is playing the ball not the man, which is a decent compromise.
It’s not an easy call when one of the candidates is in the hospital. Seems reasonable to challenge Trump on his record in office, while dropping the more personal negative ads that are a feature of American campaigning.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
He has a good speechwriter
... and he delivers it well and convincingly which he couldn't do if he were a demented old fool.
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
The nature of the original Spanish lockdown doesn't exactly help in that respect. Even if London was locked down in isolation (under the rules we had last time) i'm not sure there would necessarily be an enormous exodus. Although maybe it's all a relative thing - and in both cases it's still a relatively small proportion of people.
Nearly 250,000 people left London before the 23rd March Lockdown
On 16th March, the day that the government asked households to self-isolate should any single member show symptoms of coronavirus, just over 100,000 people had left already London for other parts of the country. This figure rose to just under 150,000 on 18th March, which was the day that school closures were announced to begin in two day’s time. When schools closed across the UK at end of the day on 20th March, total net outflow from London had risen again to stand at just over 200,0000 and three days later, when the Prime Minister asked people to stay home for all but essential reasons, the total reached 237,000.
Mr. Sandpit, not a fan of hard age limits (beyond the necessary age of majority).
William Marshal was in his seventies, I think, when he won the Battle of Lincoln and saved England from the French.
Edited extra bit: for that matter, Seleucus and Lysimachus were in their seventies when they contested mastery of the world at the Battle of Corupedium.
Never mind that, Antigonus died in battle at Ipsos at the age of 81. Shame Alexander didn't do longevity like all his generals did.
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican, is the current president pro tempore in the Senate. He is 87.
Don’t any of these people ever retire gracefully? They should have a maximum age of 65 to run for office, in the same way they have a minimum age of 35 for the President.
Churchill was 66 when he became PM and left office finally in 1955 at 80. Gladstone finished his final term as PM at 84. Reagan was 69 when first elected.
Most PMs and Presidents will be in the age bracket of 40 to 65 when they are in office but that does not mean there are not exceptional cases who can do the job older than that
It's widely accepted that Churchill was 'well out of it' when he actually resigned though.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
This was mentioned when I used to post the Betfair prices showing a risk premium for Biden compared with his party (and sometimes, including the current situation, for Trump as well). It is quite possible for the President Elect not to be the Betfair winner. There is another factor to be considered, which is that the campaigns would presumably change their adverts to say "vote Trump, get Pence" or similar in which case it might be argued that votes for Biden really were knowingly cast as votes for Harris. Some states might even change the name on the ballot, overcoming logistical difficulties, but others not.
So my considered opinion is that I have no idea which way Betfair would jump, or even which way they *should* jump.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
He has a good speechwriter
... and he delivers it well and convincingly which he couldn't do if he were a demented old fool.
As I have said before if Biden wins he will be a Democratic Reagan in my view, if he loses closer to Hubert Humphrey
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
The nature of the original Spanish lockdown doesn't exactly help in that respect. Even if London was locked down in isolation (under the rules we had last time) i'm not sure there would necessarily be an enormous exodus. Although maybe it's all a relative thing - and in both cases it's still a relatively small proportion of people.
Nearly 250,000 people left London before the 23rd March Lockdown
On 16th March, the day that the government asked households to self-isolate should any single member show symptoms of coronavirus, just over 100,000 people had left already London for other parts of the country. This figure rose to just under 150,000 on 18th March, which was the day that school closures were announced to begin in two day’s time. When schools closed across the UK at end of the day on 20th March, total net outflow from London had risen again to stand at just over 200,0000 and three days later, when the Prime Minister asked people to stay home for all but essential reasons, the total reached 237,000.
And on a relative scale how does that compare with Madrid? Also, my point is that in March nobody really knew what it would be like. Whether it would repeat now i don't know (and those who left first time might not have come back yet of course).
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
Your comment that Pence would automatically become "candidate" just isn't right. Pence is Vice President, and Vice Presidential Candidate. He is not Vice Candidate. His name is on the ballot as a candidate for the VICE Presidency, which the Electoral College also - and separately - decides (individual voters cannot vote split for President and Vice President but EVs can)
Here we go again - just like how it spread far and wide in last spring. Do they never learn?
Would you expect anything else?
The same thing would happen anywhere if people think they're going to be imprisoned for months, with an out-of-control plague raging around them, and they've somewhere else - anywhere else- plausible to go.
The only way you stop an exodus like this is to seal all the routes out of the city and have blokes with guns turn people back.
The nature of the original Spanish lockdown doesn't exactly help in that respect. Even if London was locked down in isolation (under the rules we had last time) i'm not sure there would necessarily be an enormous exodus. Although maybe it's all a relative thing - and in both cases it's still a relatively small proportion of people.
Nearly 250,000 people left London before the 23rd March Lockdown
On 16th March, the day that the government asked households to self-isolate should any single member show symptoms of coronavirus, just over 100,000 people had left already London for other parts of the country. This figure rose to just under 150,000 on 18th March, which was the day that school closures were announced to begin in two day’s time. When schools closed across the UK at end of the day on 20th March, total net outflow from London had risen again to stand at just over 200,0000 and three days later, when the Prime Minister asked people to stay home for all but essential reasons, the total reached 237,000.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
I'm extremely doubtful about the phrase ' it is quite likely that he (Trump) will withdraw from the race'. On the contrary, I think even his recovery is not as 'good' as Johnson's I suspect (fear?) he'll be back, boasting of his 'strength'.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
There's no time to change candidates though. I've already voted like many others. Trump is the candidate.
How Betfair decides this is a guess.
"While things are not certain, what’s most likely that the election would take place on time with the deceased or incapacitated candidate’s name on the ballot, and then there would be a question if legislatures would allow presidential electors of each state to vote for someone other than the deceased candidate."
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
He has a good speechwriter
... and he delivers it well and convincingly which he couldn't do if he were a demented old fool.
He's no demented old fool. Old? Yes. But otherwise an alert and thoroughly decent public servant who seems to hark back to better America. To me at least, from a distance.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
GOP have long since given up on able candidates who would serve the nation rather than their own party's most base interests.
It is morally bankrupt.
That sounds familiar. Reminds me of another ancient political party somewhere that seems more interested nowadays in serving its own party's most base interests.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
GOP have long since given up on able candidates who would serve the nation rather than their own party's most base interests.
It is morally bankrupt.
Romney was nominee less than 10 years ago and was probably the most able nominee from either party for decades
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
Anybody but himself
Of course. Because he's on the sweet spot on the Laffer curve.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
What is the point of challenging for office if one can't challenge your opponent's adminstration in office. Biden is playing the ball not the man, which is a decent compromise.
It’s not an easy call when one of the candidates is in the hospital. Seems reasonable to challenge Trump on his record in office, while dropping the more personal negative ads that are a feature of American campaigning.
Of course he should continue attacking Trump’s record, a record which includes not taking this disease seriously, which has led to 7.3 million Americans infected and 200,000 dying.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
GOP have long since given up on able candidates who would serve the nation rather than their own party's most base interests.
It is morally bankrupt.
That sounds familiar. Reminds me of another ancient political party somewhere that seems more interested nowadays in serving its own party's most base interests.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
Anybody but himself
More like anybody but the old. The Conservative Party is really the Geriatric Party. That's its main purpose.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
When you vote for a Presidential ticket, you vote for a slate of electoral voters who have formally pledged in advance of the ballots being printed to vote for X for President and Y for Vice President. That isn't a game of opinion - it's the world of fact.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
Tax rises on anyone, rich or poor, are not the answer when we need to revive economic growth
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
I'm extremely doubtful about the phrase ' it is quite likely that he (Trump) will withdraw from the race'. On the contrary, I think even his recovery is not as 'good' as Johnson's I suspect (fear?) he'll be back, boasting of his 'strength'.
The Art of the Deal. Know when to hold 'em. Know when to fold 'em.
If he is convinced he is going to lose this gives him a face saving way out. "I would have won bigly if the Chinese hadn't interfered".
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
If the betfair rules were clear they wouldn't continually suspend the market
In my 2nd and 3rd year of Uni I selected logic subjects. As an introduction to logic you were introduced to the methods of producing the formulae and given long articles in this sort of form to construct the equations to see if the written argument held together (Acts of Parliament were others used).
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
When you vote for a Presidential ticket, you vote for a slate of electoral voters who have formally pledged in advance of the ballots being printed to vote for X for President and Y for Vice President. That isn't a game of opinion - it's the world of fact.
Sorry it isn't clear even if you think it is.
If it were clear then there would only be two names in the next President bet, and the odds on Trump/Biden would be identical to Republican/Democrat.
Betfair are allowing this to happen. Punters are causing it to happen. This wouldn't be the case if the rules were very, very clear.
My basic point is that the rules are not clear, and I have given another interpretation of them which may or may not be correct. We'll see when Betfair settles.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
It says projected electoral votes from 2020 presidential election. Combine with the next sentence about: "Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market."
I think the implication of 'subsequent' is that the market should be settled *before* the electoral college votes, based on what is projected from how the 2020 election went.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
If the betfair rules were clear they wouldn't continually suspend the market
I'm not claiming everyone betting understands the rules, and can see why Betfair would suspend to prevent a disorderly market.
What I am saying is that there is no genuine ambiguity as to how bets would be settled as it is, in fact, set out in the small print in a way which is not ambiguous.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
There’s plenty of spending still to be ‘optimised’. Tax rises simply hold growth down on the way out of the recession.
Hopefully the pandemic and accompanying recession will encourage governments to think outside the box, both in terms of what they do and how they pay for it.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
I'm extremely doubtful about the phrase ' it is quite likely that he (Trump) will withdraw from the race'. On the contrary, I think even his recovery is not as 'good' as Johnson's I suspect (fear?) he'll be back, boasting of his 'strength'.
The Art of the Deal. Know when to hold 'em. Know when to fold 'em.
If he is convinced he is going to lose this gives him a face saving way out. "I would have won bigly if the Chinese hadn't interfered".
Interesting thought. And a very credible way forward for him.
Could still leave him in court in a few months though.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
There’s plenty of spending still to be ‘optimised’. Tax rises simply hold growth down on the way out of the recession.
Hopefully the pandemic and accompanying recession will encourage governments to think outside the box, both in terms of what they do and how they pay for it.
Exactly, the focus should be first reviving economic growth, then reducing the deficit, without economic growth you will not get the tax revenues to reduce the deficit anyway
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
When you vote for a Presidential ticket, you vote for a slate of electoral voters who have formally pledged in advance of the ballots being printed to vote for X for President and Y for Vice President. That isn't a game of opinion - it's the world of fact.
Sorry it isn't clear even if you think it is.
If it were clear then there would only be two names in the next President bet, and the odds on Trump/Biden would be identical to Republican/Democrat.
Betfair are allowing this to happen. Punters are causing it to happen. This wouldn't be the case if the rules were very, very clear.
My basic point is that the rules are not clear, and I have given another interpretation of them which may or may not be correct. We'll see when Batfair settles.
I suspect that betfair would pay out on Pence not Trump because it will just look weird not to based on the title of market.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
When you vote for a Presidential ticket, you vote for a slate of electoral voters who have formally pledged in advance of the ballots being printed to vote for X for President and Y for Vice President. That isn't a game of opinion - it's the world of fact.
Sorry it isn't clear even if you think it is.
If it were clear then there would only be two names in the next President bet, and the odds on Trump/Biden would be identical to Republican/Democrat.
No, they wouldn't. Firstly, the rules being clear isn't the same as all punters understanding them - and I entirely accept some don't.
Secondly, there are still rules for where nobody gets 270+ pledged electoral votes because of a 269-269 draw, a third party candidate winning states, or states' results not being validated due to fraud. None is likely, although the latter two have of course happened historically. In that case, the 12th amendment applies and Kanye West is President (possibly).
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
How about taxing China instead?
Sadly British military power in East Asia isn't what it used to be.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
There’s plenty of spending still to be ‘optimised’. Tax rises simply hold growth down on the way out of the recession.
Hopefully the pandemic and accompanying recession will encourage governments to think outside the box, both in terms of what they do and how they pay for it.
Exactly, the focus should be first reviving economic growth, then reducing the deficit, without economic growth you will not get the tax revenues to reduce the deficit anyway
'Reviving economic growth' should include ensuring that a significant share of profits made in one country is taxed or otherwise spent in that country. Not exported 'offshore' or squirrelled away in some small state which has more income than it knows what to do with.
A pity as Romney being a Republican yet having voted to impeach Trump but still sending his prayers for the Trumps recovery yesterday is probably one of the few potential Presidents who might be acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans at the moment.
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
Biden's 22 minute speech in Grand Rapids yesterday was awesome. On that speech alone we have clearly been sold a lie that he is nothing more than a demented old fool.
Should we be concerned though about the reports that Biden has suspended negative campaign ads, but Republicans are barrelling on full steam ahead?
The Trump campaign's argument was Biden's speech attacked the record of the administration still so they will keep running negative ads in return
I see Biden like Starmer is focusing on taxing the rich more
A Conservative economist on Radio 4, can't remember who, suggested yesterday, that QE and spending cuts have already been optimised, so to pay for the pandemic and the aftermath, tax rises are the only viable solution.
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
How about taxing China instead?
How? We can tax UK consumers who buy Chinese goods (not a bad idea, of course) or Chinese companies that operate in the UK. We can't exactly send HMRC to Beijing and demand money.
My reading of the betfair rules is that Trump is winner even if he has died before election day.
"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."
Pence may actually become President, but Trump is the candidate.
The market is entitled: "Who will be elected to be the next President of the United States of America as a result of the 2020 presidential election?"
Surely this cannot be settled as Trump even though he had died?
If your interpretation is the case the market in play now would not have any other possible outcomes other than Biden and Trump.
BF rules also say, in event of a EC draw, "this market will be settled on the person chosen as President". If a draw they would not choose a dead person. So this reinforces my belief that your interpretation cannot be correct.
Right at the bottom their rules it says: " If any candidate withdraws for any reason, including death, all bets on the market will stand and be settled as per the defined rules" Im not sure how helpful or not this sentence is.
Any other views on this?
Your first bit on the "in the event of a draw" bit is parahrasing which slightly misses the key point. In fact, the first bit of the paragraph says:
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
I don't think your third paragraph follows from your second.
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
At this stage, the name on the ballots is Trump's. Ballots are in fact being cast right now in most states. So that isn't changing.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
No it's not clear. It's your interpretation. The fact that the ballot papers had Trump's name on them would not alter the fact that the projected electoral votes (not the same thing as the balloted votes) would be for Pence.
Sorry, Barnesian, it is completely clear on the face of the rules. This isn't an area of ambiguity - the Betfair rules are well written and very, very clear. They have obviously thought about the issues in what is a pretty high value market, and addressed them.
If the betfair rules were clear they wouldn't continually suspend the market
I'm not claiming everyone betting understands the rules, and can see why Betfair would suspend to prevent a disorderly market.
What I am saying is that there is no genuine ambiguity as to how bets would be settled as it is, in fact, set out in the small print in a way which is not ambiguous.
There is ambiguity because they don't state what will happen if a candidate dies. Betdaq explicitly have done so. The Betfair further rules deal with Electoral college shenanigans
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/03/dramatic-plunge-in-london-air-pollution-since-2016-report-finds
And Christie as well. He was debate prepping Trump.
I do hope he recovers in time
Nobody should want anyone to pass away
Are you advocating "foreign interference" in elections?
He is also one of the most able candidates to ever have run for President, having top grades from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School and an extremely successful business career before he entered politics which made him hundreds of millions of dollars as well as being a deeply moral man, a leader in the Mormon Church and married to his wife Ann for 51 years without a hint of scandal.
He is certainly the most able nominee the Republicans have had since Bush Snr, his misfortune in 2012 was to be up against Obama seeking re election, a grade A candidate, in any other year he would had a good chance to win and he is certainly more able than Trump or Biden will be for the office
William Marshal was in his seventies, I think, when he won the Battle of Lincoln and saved England from the French.
Edited extra bit: for that matter, Seleucus and Lysimachus were in their seventies when they contested mastery of the world at the Battle of Corupedium.
Could a Republican legislature—for example, Pennsylvania’s—say that an election with one deceased candidate on the ballot is not really an election where voters have made a choice, and try to appoint electors directly?
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/trump-positive-what-happens-if-candidate-incapacitated-or-dies.html
Could the Coney Barrett event be the first cases of suicide by Covid? A similarly reckless act of self-endangerment.as suicide by cop.
"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."
So if the Trump/Pence slate wins most "projected" Electoral College votes at the election, BF pays out on Trump whatever the medical situation.
If, when the Electoral College meet, they chose someone other than Trump (the example of faithless electors is used, but following "such as" so it'd cover where Trump was no longer available for the gig) it doesn't matter - they pay out on Trump. The winner of most "projected" votes won't be President, but that doesn't matter under the terms.
It's only where it is a 269/269 draw* that the tie-breaker comes into play, and "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." It is only in that incrediby limited situation that Pence (and possibly other people) come into play, even if Pence were to become President tomorrow for unfortunate reasons, and remain it due to the Trump/Pence ticket winning in November.
* technically, it comes into play if both tickets fall short of 270, even if one has more EVs than the other, perhaps due to failure of a state to validate due to fraud (unlikely - though there could be court cases), or a third party candidate winning a state (no real chance of that).
Most PMs and Presidents will be in the age bracket of 40 to 65 when they are in office but that does not mean there are not exceptional cases who can do the job older than that
It is morally bankrupt.
However, i think Stocky has a point that the way the market is titled is potentially in conflict with the rules.
I think it's worth covering Pence because betfair may not agree with my interpretation.
I do wish i'd bet less on this market and more on Dem/Rep one!
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1312192506910572544
It is unlikely that Trump will die but it is quite likely that he will withdraw from the race and that the Republican candidate will become Pence. If Pence is "the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election", Betfair will pay up on Pence according to their rules.
On 16th March, the day that the government asked households to self-isolate should any single member show symptoms of coronavirus, just over 100,000 people had left already London for other parts of the country. This figure rose to just under 150,000 on 18th March, which was the day that school closures were announced to begin in two day’s time. When schools closed across the UK at end of the day on 20th March, total net outflow from London had risen again to stand at just over 200,0000 and three days later, when the Prime Minister asked people to stay home for all but essential reasons, the total reached 237,000.
https://static.oxford-covid-19.com/
All's well
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1312233807991496704
So my considered opinion is that I have no idea which way Betfair would jump, or even which way they *should* jump.
So, if Trump were to "withdraw" this would mean saying, regrettably, he'd be unable to continue as President (either immediately or from January) and would be telling "his" electoral college voters to seat Pence.
But those would still be projected Trump electoral votes, and the fact (if it transpires) those EVs were ultimately cast for Pence on Trump's advice when the Electoral College does so in December, it makes no difference whatsoever. I hope this is clear.
Your comment that Pence would automatically become "candidate" just isn't right. Pence is Vice President, and Vice Presidential Candidate. He is not Vice Candidate. His name is on the ballot as a candidate for the VICE Presidency, which the Electoral College also - and separately - decides (individual voters cannot vote split for President and Vice President but EVs can)
So I guess, who do we tax? The rich or the poor. You seem to be implying it should be the poor.
How he does it is another matter, of course.
It has about as much influence as any actor bleating on about politics does.
'
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1312008670436352001?s=20
When you vote for a Presidential ticket, you vote for a slate of electoral voters who have formally pledged in advance of the ballots being printed to vote for X for President and Y for Vice President. That isn't a game of opinion - it's the world of fact.
If he is convinced he is going to lose this gives him a face saving way out.
"I would have won bigly if the Chinese hadn't interfered".
In my 2nd and 3rd year of Uni I selected logic subjects. As an introduction to logic you were introduced to the methods of producing the formulae and given long articles in this sort of form to construct the equations to see if the written argument held together (Acts of Parliament were others used).
If it were clear then there would only be two names in the next President bet, and the odds on Trump/Biden would be identical to Republican/Democrat.
Betfair are allowing this to happen. Punters are causing it to happen. This wouldn't be the case if the rules were very, very clear.
My basic point is that the rules are not clear, and I have given another interpretation of them which may or may not be correct. We'll see when Betfair settles.
"Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market."
I think the implication of 'subsequent' is that the market should be settled *before* the electoral college votes, based on what is projected from how the 2020 election went.
What I am saying is that there is no genuine ambiguity as to how bets would be settled as it is, in fact, set out in the small print in a way which is not ambiguous.
Hopefully the pandemic and accompanying recession will encourage governments to think outside the box, both in terms of what they do and how they pay for it.
Could still leave him in court in a few months though.
Secondly, there are still rules for where nobody gets 270+ pledged electoral votes because of a 269-269 draw, a third party candidate winning states, or states' results not being validated due to fraud. None is likely, although the latter two have of course happened historically. In that case, the 12th amendment applies and Kanye West is President (possibly).