Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Trump’s money troubles: cutting advertising spend in key states points to problems – politicalbettin

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 10 in General
imageTrump’s money troubles: cutting advertising spend in key states points to problems – politicalbetting.com

Donald Trump is famously so poor that he only paid $750 in federal income tax in 2016. His campaigning in 2016 was similarly economical. In that election, Trump raised and spent only just over half the total of his opponent: Hillary winning the funding battle by $1191m to $647m. In the end, of course, that didn’t matter; Trump won the election.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    First
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 3,285
    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/09/politics/north-carolina-senate-race-cal-cunningham-thom-tillis/index.html

    GOP hoping that the sex scandal in North Carolina may help them hold into the Senate

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    multiplying fourthly
  • Morning David, and thanks as ever for the piece.

    Have you been betting on the event and what's your prediction for Nov 3rd?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    Does advertising actually make that much difference?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    Half of the money spent is wasted; trouble is, you don't know which half! More seriously, isn't it a Get our the Vote effort........ surprising low turnouts in US elections, even Presidential ones.
  • IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    I've often wondered that but if it didn't they wouldn't do it....I suppose.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    Interested in what @MrEd (i think) said yesterday that us tv advertising is cash up front well in advance which is how I'd do it if I were us tv. How solid is the info as to where money is being pulled or spent?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733

    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    Half of the money spent is wasted; trouble is, you don't know which half! More seriously, isn't it a Get our the Vote effort........ surprising low turnouts in US elections, even Presidential ones.
    And we get played a lot of TV ads - but surely US viewing habits are as fragmented as in the UK? More so, with the partisan dimension to so many channels.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    Maybe he should have led the one named immediately above?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,324
    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    Is it more a canary in the coal mine sorta thing, ie a dearth of people who think a candidate is worth punting hard cash on just adds to the smell of death about a campaign?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    edited October 10
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    Half of the money spent is wasted; trouble is, you don't know which half! More seriously, isn't it a Get our the Vote effort........ surprising low turnouts in US elections, even Presidential ones.
    And we get played a lot of TV ads - but surely US viewing habits are as fragmented as in the UK? More so, with the partisan dimension to so many channels.
    One would have thought so; does an openly pro-Trump (for example) channel accept DEM ads?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,100
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 3,543
    There are some good "Trump is so broke..." gags in Michelle Wolfe's press correspondents dinner speech.
  • IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    Half of the money spent is wasted; trouble is, you don't know which half! More seriously, isn't it a Get our the Vote effort........ surprising low turnouts in US elections, even Presidential ones.
    I was in the States for Bush/Kerry and visited a few polling stations. I was struck by how short the voting hours were and how complex some of the ballot forms.

    You'd almost think they weren't encouraging people to vote. Hmmmm.....
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,890
    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    If both sides spend lots of money on advertising, and both sides are reasonably effective about the messages they choose, then their efforts are likely to cancel out, and it won't look like it makes much of a difference. You only then notice a difference when there's a difference in the TV advertising between the campaigns.

    That said, I'd think micro-targeting of voters with online advertising was much more important these days.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    IshmaelZ said:

    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.

    Son, I think that is Barron Trump.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,100
    edited October 10
    IshmaelZ said:

    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.

    That’s Barron. His son. He’s grown since then. He’s grown a lot.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,324
    edited October 10
    IshmaelZ said:

    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.

    It's Barron, the Donald's youngest.
    Unlike the rest of the brood I do feel a twinge of pity for him; those creeps seem to love being part of the ghastly circus while he looks as if he loathes it.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    Is this one of the most confused articles that you could read?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8822719/Richmond-Thames-Londons-Covid-19-hotspot.html

    London might be on the verge of new lockdown, or the R number is now below 1. Richmond is now London’s leading hotspot, or it is having huge numbers of cases attributed to it for students far far away. It’s spread all over the place with no clear pattern - and nobody can find any cause (so presumably there is no “test and trace”). The whole thing’s a complete farce.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 8,420
    edited October 10
    Btw, I see that New C19 Cases in the US exceeded 60,000 yesterday. Looks like they're experiencing the same kind of rise we have in Europe. The US geographical pattern has changed though. It used to be very much driven by a few States - New York, Jersey, California, Texas - but is now much more evenly spread. There are some surprisingly high numbers in places like Utah, the Dakotas, and Kansas. Only five States now have fewer than (less than?) 10,000 recorded cases.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671

    IshmaelZ said:

    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.

    It's Barron, the Donald's youngest.
    Unlike the rest of the brood I do feel a twinge of pity for him; those creeps seem to love being part of the ghastly circus while he looks as if he loathes it.
    Surely being embarrassed to be seen in public with your parents is a normal in a teenager?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 8,420
    edited October 10
    Does anybody know if David Hersdon is related to David Herdson?

    Gotta walk dog. Back later.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    alex_ said:

    Is this one of the most confused articles that you could read?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8822719/Richmond-Thames-Londons-Covid-19-hotspot.html

    London might be on the verge of new lockdown, or the R number is now below 1. Richmond is now London’s leading hotspot, or it is having huge numbers of cases attributed to it for students far far away. It’s spread all over the place with no clear pattern - and nobody can find any cause (so presumably there is no “test and trace”). The whole thing’s a complete farce.

    Test and Trace only really works when a disease is suppressed. Once it is endemic again it is like fighting the tide.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,324
    edited October 10
    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I do pity that boy on the right of the picture in the header. Presumably a Trump grandson who would much, much rather not be a Trump grandson.

    It's Barron, the Donald's youngest.
    Unlike the rest of the brood I do feel a twinge of pity for him; those creeps seem to love being part of the ghastly circus while he looks as if he loathes it.
    Surely being embarrassed to be seen in public with your parents is a normal in a teenager?
    Mebbes, but imagine to what level that would be increased if papa was (let's face it) the most famous man in the world, and a semi deranged, narcissistic grotesque?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,796
    edited October 10
    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    It wont change anyone's mind at this stage but it can be very useful in reminding people why they need to get out and vote.



  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    Roger said:

    IanB2 said:

    Does advertising actually make that much difference?

    It wont change anyone's mind at this stage but it can be very useful in reminding people why they need to get out and vote.



    It does need to reach people first, though. Are all Americans sat on the sofa watching TV?

    On another subject, Trumpy's recent comments about his virus tests suggest they are giving him a score, rather than simply positive/negative? I wasnt aware that the tests worked like that; surely how much virus you pick up on a swab depends heavily on how the test was done and with a lot of random variation?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,032
    Did the LtCol who postponed his retirement to build the first Nightingale get an honour?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Is this one of the most confused articles that you could read?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8822719/Richmond-Thames-Londons-Covid-19-hotspot.html

    London might be on the verge of new lockdown, or the R number is now below 1. Richmond is now London’s leading hotspot, or it is having huge numbers of cases attributed to it for students far far away. It’s spread all over the place with no clear pattern - and nobody can find any cause (so presumably there is no “test and trace”). The whole thing’s a complete farce.

    Test and Trace only really works when a disease is suppressed. Once it is endemic again it is like fighting the tide.
    That’s true, but also missing the point. It seems in many cases they are struggling to even contact the recipients of positive tests let alone do any contact tracing. But is it at all surprising if what appears to be happening here is widespread. Students taking tests in Exeter and having results sent back to GPs in Richmond, with home addresses and phone numbers in Richmond. I don’t know, but if this is then the basis of which test and trace is operating then it’s no wonder they are struggling to contact people! They aren’t where they think they are.

    I fear throughout this crisis that too often people seem to have been willing to accept and propose to act on figures without doing the really hard work necessary to check that figures are giving an accurate story. When things don’t smell quite right (Richmond numbers quadrupling in a week with no obvious cause) this needs to be challenged and explained. Proper data analysis is hard, and it is important that thingsdon’t get left unexplained. When the consequences of getting it wrong (and that includes implementing business destroying restrictions when they might not be necessary) are so dire.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 6,964
    nichomar said:

    Did the LtCol who postponed his retirement to build the first Nightingale get an honour?

    Off Topic

    That is the sort of guy who should be honoured. I personally have absolutely no problem with him receiving an honour or Marcus Radford's award either.

    As I mentioned last night, any criticism of honours bestowed on genuine heroes or "woke" do-gooders a is in no way problematic, when the alternative is the ennoblement of Christopher Chope. Rewarding Chope with a knighthood, should be the single act that brings down the entire awards system.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    ‘Donald Trump is famously so poor that he only paid $750 in federal income tax in 2016.’

    And I thought @TSE was the master of vicious sarcasm.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    It’s a good job Business for Scotland isn’t a political party.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 2,130
    Thanks David. Answers (like others did) my question yesterday.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 6,964

    Does anybody know if David Hersdon is related to David Herdson?

    Gotta walk dog. Back later.

    Possibly not. It could just be another new SeanT. moniker.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 4,230

    nichomar said:

    Did the LtCol who postponed his retirement to build the first Nightingale get an honour?

    Off Topic

    That is the sort of guy who should be honoured. I personally have absolutely no problem with him receiving an honour or Marcus Radford's award either.

    As I mentioned last night, any criticism of honours bestowed on genuine heroes or "woke" do-gooders a is in no way problematic, when the alternative is the ennoblement of Christopher Chope. Rewarding Chope with a knighthood, should be the single act that brings down the entire awards system.
    Why? The Brexiteers are gathering their rewards...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    ydoethur said:

    It’s a good job Business for Scotland isn’t a political party.
    I want to know what the Burning Pink party's policies are? I'm intrigued.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    Incidentally I was looking at the current Nevada voter registration figures and as it stands if the Dems and Reps hit their average Voter Reg-to-Final Vote figure then the Dems win by five.

    If the Dems hit their worst level (0.77 in 2000) and the GOP hit their best (1.06 Under Romney) then the GOP win by 10.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Is this one of the most confused articles that you could read?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8822719/Richmond-Thames-Londons-Covid-19-hotspot.html

    London might be on the verge of new lockdown, or the R number is now below 1. Richmond is now London’s leading hotspot, or it is having huge numbers of cases attributed to it for students far far away. It’s spread all over the place with no clear pattern - and nobody can find any cause (so presumably there is no “test and trace”). The whole thing’s a complete farce.

    Test and Trace only really works when a disease is suppressed. Once it is endemic again it is like fighting the tide.
    It's lucky we had a world beating test and trace when the virus was suppressed over the summer then.


    Oh wait...

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    Jonathan said:

    Absolutely no quarter given with that one.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 6,964

    Jonathan said:

    Absolutely no quarter given with that one.

    I do wonder whether the subtlety of the Lincoln Project ads won't be lost on anyone contemplating voting for Trump.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 3,691
    Looks like Roger Stone is still in the picture. See link below.

    If Trump had agreed to a virtual 2nd debate I think it would have set a precedent for the 3rd debate to be virtual as well. As it is, looks like Trump is assuming that 3rd (now 2nd) debate will be in person and a further debate on 29 Oct may be possible.

    My guess is that the Dems will insist on all debates being virtual. I`m not sure how this will play out.

    https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/looks-like-trump-is-still-taking-roger-stones-election-advice/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,032
    Rule of 6, 11 closing of bars and reduced Capacity to 50% in Madrid, fines 600 to 600,000 euro, 7000 law enforcement agents on the streets and managing the perimeter.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 5,608
    IanB2 said:

    Maybe he should have led the one named immediately above?
    Mark Oaten and Keith "Jim" Vaz are already co-leaders.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 5,608
    Roger said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Just imagine if he could take Boris with him.....everyday would be a sunny one.
    Get used to seeing his fucking stupid face which manages to be simultaneously haggard and bloated. He's not going anywhere until he loses the next GE.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 6,964
    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    Wow, I thought pretty much anyone but a Literal Democrat could register these days.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    edited October 10
    Dura_Ace said:

    Roger said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Just imagine if he could take Boris with him.....everyday would be a sunny one.
    Get used to seeing his fucking stupid face which manages to be simultaneously haggard and bloated. He's not going anywhere until he loses the next GE.
    Probably not. He might not enjoy the job, he might well become very unpopular, but he fought like hell to get there so won't go lightly, and if May can hang on for 2 years, much of which she had no control of her party and no parliamentary control, no way Boris is forced aside by Rishi or bad boy Baker.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    Stocky said:

    Looks like Roger Stone is still in the picture. See link below.

    If Trump had agreed to a virtual 2nd debate I think it would have set a precedent for the 3rd debate to be virtual as well. As it is, looks like Trump is assuming that 3rd (now 2nd) debate will be in person and a further debate on 29 Oct may be possible.

    My guess is that the Dems will insist on all debates being virtual. I`m not sure how this will play out.

    https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/looks-like-trump-is-still-taking-roger-stones-election-advice/

    If Trump's hangers-on are still infectious then absolutely the final one should be virtual.

    There won't be a third debate on the 29th, the debate on the 22nd has already been confirmed as the [now second and] final debate.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,815
    Stocky said:

    Looks like Roger Stone is still in the picture. See link below.

    If Trump had agreed to a virtual 2nd debate I think it would have set a precedent for the 3rd debate to be virtual as well. As it is, looks like Trump is assuming that 3rd (now 2nd) debate will be in person and a further debate on 29 Oct may be possible.

    My guess is that the Dems will insist on all debates being virtual. I`m not sure how this will play out.

    https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/looks-like-trump-is-still-taking-roger-stones-election-advice/

    I imagine the Dems will leave the Debate Commission to argue with Trump about the rules, his team seems to have infected a bunch of their staff the first time around so they're going to want either a virtual 3rd debate or proper testing protocols. I guess Trump will then object to something they propose unless they're confident he can both pass a covid test and survive a debate without coughing fits.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505

    Stocky said:

    Looks like Roger Stone is still in the picture. See link below.

    If Trump had agreed to a virtual 2nd debate I think it would have set a precedent for the 3rd debate to be virtual as well. As it is, looks like Trump is assuming that 3rd (now 2nd) debate will be in person and a further debate on 29 Oct may be possible.

    My guess is that the Dems will insist on all debates being virtual. I`m not sure how this will play out.

    https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/looks-like-trump-is-still-taking-roger-stones-election-advice/

    If Trump's hangers-on are still infectious then absolutely the final one should be virtual.

    There won't be a third debate on the 29th, the debate on the 22nd has already been confirmed as the [now second and] final debate.
    Biden should stay well away. The risk is all his and on the downside only. He gets the virus or he makes a massive gaffe at the last minute.

    Just say No, Joe.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    kle4 said:

    Wow, I thought pretty much anyone but a Literal Democrat could register these days.
    Is this to do with the Alliance party of NIreland?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    The Ragin Cajun has never been more sure of something in his life.

    God this is going to be unbearable if Trump squeaks thru thanks to the Supreme Court.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,796
    edited October 10
    Interesting if anyone's got six minutes to spare. Seems to have been watched by over 4 million people but about as subtle as Borat. My feeling is they've misjudged their target market?

    Sorry wrong link. I'll try again. This is it

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090

    ydoethur said:

    It’s a good job Business for Scotland isn’t a political party.
    I want to know what the Burning Pink party's policies are? I'm intrigued.

    They think extinction rebellion are capitalist sell outs if that helps.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    edited October 10

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,098
    .Just on the article, a few things to point out (and David is right, money is not everything, ask Mike Bloomberg and how much he spent for the Primaries) re David's premise:

    1. He is right - Biden is massively outraising Trump at the moment when it comes to donations;

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    3. There are three main reasons you pull spending. One you don't have the money (political parties get the lowest rate in an election year so you have to be desperate to do so); two, you think you have lost the state; three, you think you have won the state and do not need to spend more. There is an assumption on David's part, this is one and two and he might be right. Another scenario, is that it is 3. Also, if this is a concern that his base is collapsing, then you would have expected money to go to PA and NC.

    4. This article from nearly a month ago sums up the approaches pretty well (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/15/912663101/biden-is-outspending-trump-on-tv-and-just-6-states-are-the-focus-of-the-campaign). Note given the nature of US TV, you want to have your ads schedule pretty much booked in advance. There re some changes here (e.g. Minnesota) but the strategies looked to have played out as expected. Note their comment about Texas - people were excited about Biden spending in Texas but that was on the cards nearly a month ago.

    5. The sums involved actually aren't that big. $12m is peanuts in the race (total spend is expected to be $11bn) and that is across 5 states.

    6. Finally, take a look at this which have posted before: https://www.mediaelection.com/#timeline Their premise is that looking at which candidate is dominating the news cycle is a better way of predicting the result than polling. I have yet to be convinced but there is no doubt Trump is generating a lot of free or earned advertising
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    Dura_Ace said:

    Roger said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Just imagine if he could take Boris with him.....everyday would be a sunny one.
    Get used to seeing his fucking stupid face which manages to be simultaneously haggard and bloated. He's not going anywhere until he loses the next GE.
    And those little piggy eyes radiating facetious self-regard and entitlement.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,679
    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Remove him and they might at least go into remission.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    MrEd said:

    .Just on the article, a few things to point out (and David is right, money is not everything, ask Mike Bloomberg and how much he spent for the Primaries) re David's premise:

    1. He is right - Biden is massively outraising Trump at the moment when it comes to donations;

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    3. There are three main reasons you pull spending. One you don't have the money (political parties get the lowest rate in an election year so you have to be desperate to do so); two, you think you have lost the state; three, you think you have won the state and do not need to spend more. There is an assumption on David's part, this is one and two and he might be right. Another scenario, is that it is 3. Also, if this is a concern that his base is collapsing, then you would have expected money to go to PA and NC.

    4. This article from nearly a month ago sums up the approaches pretty well (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/15/912663101/biden-is-outspending-trump-on-tv-and-just-6-states-are-the-focus-of-the-campaign). Note given the nature of US TV, you want to have your ads schedule pretty much booked in advance. There re some changes here (e.g. Minnesota) but the strategies looked to have played out as expected. Note their comment about Texas - people were excited about Biden spending in Texas but that was on the cards nearly a month ago.

    5. The sums involved actually aren't that big. $12m is peanuts in the race (total spend is expected to be $11bn) and that is across 5 states.

    6. Finally, take a look at this which have posted before: https://www.mediaelection.com/#timeline Their premise is that looking at which candidate is dominating the news cycle is a better way of predicting the result than polling. I have yet to be convinced but there is no doubt Trump is generating a lot of free or earned advertising

    I suspect (?fear) that point 2 is too often overlooked.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    kle4 said:

    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Remove him and they might at least go into remission.
    Sullivan argues that only a huge defeat at POTUS level will allow sufficient damage to the GOP psyche to begin the renewal process. 2018's mid terms weren't anywhere near enough to persuade for a total rethink.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Lets be realistic, it is not even the GOP, it is a large chunk of the electorate and their beliefs. Trump mostly moved the GOP to where its voters are and were. His vulgar style will be replaced if he loses bigly, but the fake news and extreme division will continue.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    He's both imo. Only a sick party could have enabled him. And once enabled he has made them a deal sicker.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    No. Trump out is not the end of all that. If only.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    Radical Corbynism never had the same level of support as Trumpism. UK might be 15% Corbynista (and even within that they love a splitter group), Trumpism is closer to 30%. So it wont go away so quickly.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,021
    Clinton spent $1.1bn on that election campaign? I assume there was a money-back guarantee.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,815
    edited October 10
    MrEd said:

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    That was true, but it doesn't seem to be any more:
    But the Biden campaign has stepped up its spending of late. On Google, in particular, the Biden campaign’s spending topped the Trump campaign’s by more than $4.1 million during the first three weeks of September, according to CRP data. On Facebook, a huge spike in Trump campaign spending that coincided with the Republican convention late last month has mostly petered out, and in the week ending Sept. 20, Biden’s campaign dropped $1.4 million more on ads on the platform than Trump’s did.

    Even that total understates the trend, as it includes one day, Sept. 11, when the Biden campaign largely paused its advertising operation. Facebook ad buy data shows that the Biden campaign spent just $13,500 on the platform that day, down from $1 million a day earlier. On Sept. 12, the total was back up to $441,000.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-facebook-advantage-over-biden-is-disappearing
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    edited October 10

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    The Ragin Cajun has never been more sure of something in his life.

    God this is going to be unbearable if Trump squeaks thru thanks to the Supreme Court.
    You are such a worry bead.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    kle4 said:

    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Remove him and they might at least go into remission.
    Nope the next strong man openly racist wanker like Tom Cotton will come along and cleanup the 2024 nomination.

    The GOP welcomed and fed the racist Tea Party movement and are now going to have QAnon crawling around inside them. There are going to be QAnon supporting Congressional Representatives in the next Parliament.

    The GOP needs cleansing with fire from top to bottom.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100

    MrEd said:

    .Just on the article, a few things to point out (and David is right, money is not everything, ask Mike Bloomberg and how much he spent for the Primaries) re David's premise:

    1. He is right - Biden is massively outraising Trump at the moment when it comes to donations;

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    3. There are three main reasons you pull spending. One you don't have the money (political parties get the lowest rate in an election year so you have to be desperate to do so); two, you think you have lost the state; three, you think you have won the state and do not need to spend more. There is an assumption on David's part, this is one and two and he might be right. Another scenario, is that it is 3. Also, if this is a concern that his base is collapsing, then you would have expected money to go to PA and NC.

    4. This article from nearly a month ago sums up the approaches pretty well (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/15/912663101/biden-is-outspending-trump-on-tv-and-just-6-states-are-the-focus-of-the-campaign). Note given the nature of US TV, you want to have your ads schedule pretty much booked in advance. There re some changes here (e.g. Minnesota) but the strategies looked to have played out as expected. Note their comment about Texas - people were excited about Biden spending in Texas but that was on the cards nearly a month ago.

    5. The sums involved actually aren't that big. $12m is peanuts in the race (total spend is expected to be $11bn) and that is across 5 states.

    6. Finally, take a look at this which have posted before: https://www.mediaelection.com/#timeline Their premise is that looking at which candidate is dominating the news cycle is a better way of predicting the result than polling. I have yet to be convinced but there is no doubt Trump is generating a lot of free or earned advertising

    I suspect (?fear) that point 2 is too often overlooked.
    The Trump campaign is outspending Biden on Facebook but not by huge amounts as I understand it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    edited October 10

    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Lets be realistic, it is not even the GOP, it is a large chunk of the electorate and their beliefs. Trump mostly moved the GOP to where its voters are and were. His vulgar style will be replaced if he loses bigly, but the fake news and extreme division will continue.
    Exactly, a huge chunk of GOP supporters would like segregation back on the statute books.

    The GOP senior politicians, rather than trying to lead the people away from that view instead nudge and wink and coddle the racists.

    Trump won the Nom by getting rid of the nudge and wink part. And my pick for 2024 Tom Cotton is primed and ready to repeat.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    Radical Corbynism never had the same level of support as Trumpism. UK might be 15% Corbynista (and even within that they love a splitter group), Trumpism is closer to 30%. So it wont go away so quickly.
    There are some insights to be gleaned from Trump to Corbyn comparisons and (perhaps more so) from Trump to "Britain Trump" Johnson comparisons but imo (and thankfully) the similarities are not really there.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,098

    MrEd said:

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    That was true, but it doesn't seem to be any more:
    But the Biden campaign has stepped up its spending of late. On Google, in particular, the Biden campaign’s spending topped the Trump campaign’s by more than $4.1 million during the first three weeks of September, according to CRP data. On Facebook, a huge spike in Trump campaign spending that coincided with the Republican convention late last month has mostly petered out, and in the week ending Sept. 20, Biden’s campaign dropped $1.4 million more on ads on the platform than Trump’s did.

    Even that total understates the trend, as it includes one day, Sept. 11, when the Biden campaign largely paused its advertising operation. Facebook ad buy data shows that the Biden campaign spent just $13,500 on the platform that day, down from $1 million a day earlier. On Sept. 12, the total was back up to $441,000.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-facebook-advantage-over-biden-is-disappearing
    Google is a waste of money for political advertising (and, increasingly, the opinion is it is wasted for most advertising - it's the new Yellow Pages). The Facebook stuff is interesting but take a look at point 6 of what I mentioned. Again, I have to be convinced but the founders of that outfit claim their AI can predict the election outcome better than the polls and, if they are right, Trump is earning a hell of a lot of free media at the moment that will bring him home.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    Radical Corbynism never had the same level of support as Trumpism. UK might be 15% Corbynista (and even within that they love a splitter group), Trumpism is closer to 30%. So it wont go away so quickly.
    There are some insights to be gleaned from Trump to Corbyn comparisons and (perhaps more so) from Trump to "Britain Trump" Johnson comparisons but imo (and thankfully) the similarities are not really there.
    To get there you would need to make news coverage in the UK less trusted and more partisan........
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    Lets be realistic, it is not even the GOP, it is a large chunk of the electorate and their beliefs. Trump mostly moved the GOP to where its voters are and were. His vulgar style will be replaced if he loses bigly, but the fake news and extreme division will continue.
    Exactly, a huge chunk of GOP supporters would like segregation back on the statute books.

    The GOP senior politicians, rather than trying to lead the people away from that view instead nudge and wink and coddle the racists.

    Trump won the Nom by getting rid of the nudge and wink part. And my pick for 2024 Tom Cotton is primed and ready to repeat.
    Listened to an interview from 68 with George Wallace on a podcast the other day. It was like listening to Trump if Trump were endowed with the ability to string two sentences together. Same sentiments essentially.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    Radical Corbynism never had the same level of support as Trumpism. UK might be 15% Corbynista (and even within that they love a splitter group), Trumpism is closer to 30%. So it wont go away so quickly.
    There are some insights to be gleaned from Trump to Corbyn comparisons and (perhaps more so) from Trump to "Britain Trump" Johnson comparisons but imo (and thankfully) the similarities are not really there.
    To get there you would need to make news coverage in the UK less trusted and more partisan........
    Yes. And our politics is in any case trending to our version of Reps v Dems. I hope we don't follow the US path but we might. Brexit doesn't help.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    MrEd said:

    .Just on the article, a few things to point out (and David is right, money is not everything, ask Mike Bloomberg and how much he spent for the Primaries) re David's premise:

    1. He is right - Biden is massively outraising Trump at the moment when it comes to donations;

    2. However, David is wrong to focus on just TV ad spending. There has been a fundamental difference between the two campaigns when it comes to where they spend and always have been. Trump's campaign has been digital-focused, Biden has been the traditional TV route. Bear in mind, TV viewership is going down in the States. If you look at digital, Trump has been outspending Biden significantly. There is a difference in strategy.

    3. There are three main reasons you pull spending. One you don't have the money (political parties get the lowest rate in an election year so you have to be desperate to do so); two, you think you have lost the state; three, you think you have won the state and do not need to spend more. There is an assumption on David's part, this is one and two and he might be right. Another scenario, is that it is 3. Also, if this is a concern that his base is collapsing, then you would have expected money to go to PA and NC.

    4. This article from nearly a month ago sums up the approaches pretty well (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/15/912663101/biden-is-outspending-trump-on-tv-and-just-6-states-are-the-focus-of-the-campaign). Note given the nature of US TV, you want to have your ads schedule pretty much booked in advance. There re some changes here (e.g. Minnesota) but the strategies looked to have played out as expected. Note their comment about Texas - people were excited about Biden spending in Texas but that was on the cards nearly a month ago.

    5. The sums involved actually aren't that big. $12m is peanuts in the race (total spend is expected to be $11bn) and that is across 5 states.

    6. Finally, take a look at this which have posted before: https://www.mediaelection.com/#timeline Their premise is that looking at which candidate is dominating the news cycle is a better way of predicting the result than polling. I have yet to be convinced but there is no doubt Trump is generating a lot of free or earned advertising

    2. Correction: Trump has not been outspending Biden significantly on digital expenditure. The gap between Biden and Trump has shrank dramatically in recent weeks and Trump is spending a significant proportion of his digital spending in California and New York looking for fundraising from wealthy donors - expenditure in New York and California will not swing the election. In the swing states they're spending similar amounts. See this article from yesterday which is more up to date than the one from a month ago.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/516079-trump-campaign-bets-big-on-digital-ads-to-counter-biden

    In the states that matter for the Electoral College — Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan, Arizona and Wisconsin — the two campaigns have been running about even in Facebook spending over the past month.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    My Alaska bet inches ever closer to profitability.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,890
    Alistair said:

    kinabalu said:

    From Andrew Sullivan's latest email:


    "I know it’s tempting fate to mention the idea, foolish to entertain it, mad to expect it, but the possibility of a landslide is now real.

    And all this changes a huge amount. A Biden win would be a reprieve for the country; a Biden landslide would be an American miracle.

    Unlike anything else, it would cauterize the wound of Trump, preventing further infection. It would say to posterity: we made this hideous mistake, for understandable reasons, but after four years, we saw what we did and decisively changed course. It would turn the Trump era of nihilism, tribalism and cruelty into a cautionary tale of extremism, illiberalism and, above all, failure."

    Spot on from Sullivan. A clear rejection of the man and everything about him is what is needed for America to regain its self-respect.
    From that extract it seems it is rooted in the notion that Trump is the problem rather than the Republican party as a whole.

    The GOP is sick, Trump is only a symptom not the cause.
    This I agree with. It's the GOP that needs to be routed, in all electoral domains, not just Trump and the Presidency.

    Take the Senate for example. If the GOP are really routed this time and lose races up to, and including, SC, then the GOP are down to 45. If the GOP can be kicked when they are down in the 2022 midterms then there are potential pickups for the Dems in PA, WI, NC, FL, maybe even OH and IA.

    That's the sort of rout of the GOP that is needed to drive out the Mitch McConnells. And the same in the state legislatures.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,815
    edited October 10
    MrEd said:


    Google is a waste of money for political advertising (and, increasingly, the opinion is it is wasted for most advertising - it's the new Yellow Pages). The Facebook stuff is interesting but take a look at point 6 of what I mentioned. Again, I have to be convinced but the founders of that outfit claim their AI can predict the election outcome better than the polls and, if they are right, Trump is earning a hell of a lot of free media at the moment that will bring him home.

    Whenever any sentence contains words like "founders of that outfit claim their AI can" the default assumption should be that it can't really. Things being sold as AI are at least 98% snake oil.

    I do think that Trump's ability to control the media narrative is important though. In particular he can (usually) kick a bad news story out of the news cycle almost at will. Sometimes he has to do it by replacing it with a different bad news story, but he there are lots of bad news stories about Trump that swing voters don't really care about, and he used that to great effect in 2016. I don't think it's working as well in 2020 though, because there's so much more that the voters care about that's out of his control - specifically catching a potentially lethal disease - so you can only get so far by having a laser pointer that you can make reporters chase.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    Radical Corbynism never had the same level of support as Trumpism. UK might be 15% Corbynista (and even within that they love a splitter group), Trumpism is closer to 30%. So it wont go away so quickly.
    I don't think Trumpism is 30%.

    I think for top priorities then Trumpism is ~15% and hates-the-Democrats is ~15%

    When Trump is the rival to the Democrats that is a hardcore 30% he can count upon. But once Trump is gone, especially if he loses by a landslide, then that coalition will splinter as much as the far left loves to splinter. The hate-the-Democrats voters will not want loser-Trumpists to gift the election to the Democrats again next time.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,978
    edited October 10
    Roger said:

    Interesting if anyone's got six minutes to spare. Seems to have been watched by over 4 million people but about as subtle as Borat. My feeling is they've misjudged their target market?

    Sorry wrong link. I'll try again. This is it

    Yes, I agree - too long and will really only work for people who are already convinced.

    I think the Democrats and their Lincoln allies have two main strategies to choose from - focus on Biden the calm, reliable alternative (reinforcing their strong point) or focus on the disastrous economic impact of Trumpism (attacking Trump's least negative point). They're overwhelmingly going for number 1, and it seems to be working.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,890

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Second. Good morning all, and thanks to Mr H for cheering me up. The prospect of Trump losing, and losing badly is one of the few bright spots on the horizon at the moment.

    Oh yes. :smile:

    And let's keep the theme going. Trump Toast.

    James Carville -

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-2020-polls-proves-democrats-need-start-planning-biden-ncna1242631

    He's even more certain than I am.
    That is such a sunny side up analysis it can't possibly be true. Most left of centre people will agree with me. Our disappointment has been borne out by recent history.
    Yep. Totally. But this is different. This is about America reaffirming sanity and ending something unconscionable. It's about ejecting Donald Trump from the Oval Office. The flip side is that when it happens it will have no greater meaning than that. It will not necessarily indicate a turning of the tide against right wing populism.
    About a quarter to a third of Americans have gone completely loopy through targeted fake news. They are not going to suddenly rejoin mainstream society just because of a RIGGED VOTE.
    You say that but many are still simply extreme partisans and you forget the American love of success and dislike of failures. There's a reason Trump likes to portray himself as a big, hard, successful man. Many of that third will continue to hate the Democrats (just like many Labour voters hate the Tories) but the support for Trump himself will evaporate to a tiny core just like the support for Corbyn himself evaporated.

    If Trumpism is shown to lead to Democrat landslides then continuity Trumpism will be as popular as continuity Corbynism and Rebecca Long Bailey.
    I'm trying to understand why I think the experience in the UK will not translate to the US.

    I think the major difference is the Federal nature of the US, and the separation of powers between Presidency and Congress. What this means is that GOP extremism can survive and thrive in the States and the Senate, even if it is chased out of the White House.

    A few nobbled MP nominations and some captured constituency Labour parties doesn't provide the same redoubt for Corbynism.
  • I've been wondering why the presidential debates commission didn't empty podium Trump. They could have said that the debate would continue with Biden and the Town Hall setting, and Trump would still be welcome to attend.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 14,742
    Scott_xP said:
    Always on the lookout for new and pithy ways of summing up the multiple and many faceted horrors of the Trump presidency and this here is pretty good -

    "Official lies, numbing incompetence and growing repression."

    Hats off that journalist.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    MrEd said:

    .Just on the article, a few things to point out (and David is right, money is not everything, ask Mike Bloomberg and how much he spent for the Primaries) re David's premise:


    6. Finally, take a look at this which have posted before: https://www.mediaelection.com/#timeline Their premise is that looking at which candidate is dominating the news cycle is a better way of predicting the result than polling. I have yet to be convinced but there is no doubt Trump is generating a lot of free or earned advertising

    You will find no-one more fulsome and total in my praise for Trump's ability to manipulate to credulous American media into giving him near unlimited free coverage (his Birther "press conference" in 2016 was a masterpiece so beautifully executed a single tear rolled down my cheek in awe).

    However, the current free coverage he is getting is about how he is a disease ridden corpse too ill to participate in the debates,
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100

    MrEd said:


    Google is a waste of money for political advertising (and, increasingly, the opinion is it is wasted for most advertising - it's the new Yellow Pages). The Facebook stuff is interesting but take a look at point 6 of what I mentioned. Again, I have to be convinced but the founders of that outfit claim their AI can predict the election outcome better than the polls and, if they are right, Trump is earning a hell of a lot of free media at the moment that will bring him home.

    Whenever any sentence contains words like "founders of that outfit claim their AI can" the default assumption should be that it can't really. Things being sold as AI are at least 98% snake oil.
    As far as I can see they aren't even doing any sentiment analysis.
  • alednamalednam Posts: 55
    The ugliness and volume of Trump’s rhetoric was bound to make him newsworthy. And perhaps his descriptions of female opponents (‘fat pig’, ‘slob’,‘ dog’, ‘disgusting animal’, and now ‘monster’) has endeared him to a good few men. But he found his base 4 years ago. And perhaps the use of insults and derogatory nicknames wears thin even to his supporrters. It’s being going on so long that we have to hope it brings those outside his base to vote in opposition to this extraordinarily nasty man (never mind narcissistic psychopath for a moment).
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 4,615
    edited October 10

    Roger said:

    Interesting if anyone's got six minutes to spare. Seems to have been watched by over 4 million people but about as subtle as Borat. My feeling is they've misjudged their target market?

    Sorry wrong link. I'll try again. This is it

    Yes, I agree - too long and will really only work for people who are already convinced.

    I think the Democrats and their Lincoln allies have two main strategies to choose from - focus on Biden the calm, reliable alternative (reinforcing their strong point) or focus on the disastrous economic impact of Trumpism (attacking Trump's least negative point). They're overwhelmingly going for number 1, and it seems to be working.
    It is long. It is probably targeted at people already half-convinced, in other words wavering non-Trump Republicans, which explains the preaching to the choir.

    The ending is ill-judged, though, with the patient's suicide. The doctor leaving the room would have made a better conclusion.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,098

    MrEd said:


    Google is a waste of money for political advertising (and, increasingly, the opinion is it is wasted for most advertising - it's the new Yellow Pages). The Facebook stuff is interesting but take a look at point 6 of what I mentioned. Again, I have to be convinced but the founders of that outfit claim their AI can predict the election outcome better than the polls and, if they are right, Trump is earning a hell of a lot of free media at the moment that will bring him home.

    Whenever any sentence contains words like "founders of that outfit claim their AI can" the default assumption should be that it can't really. Things being sold as AI are at least 98% snake oil.

    I do think that Trump's ability to control the media narrative is important though. In particular he can (usually) kick a bad news story out of the news cycle almost at will. Sometimes he has to do it by replacing it with a different bad news story, but he there are lots of bad news stories about Trump that swing voters don't really care about, and he used that to great effect in 2016. I don't think it's working as well in 2020 though, because there's so much more that the voters care about that's out of his control - specifically catching a potentially lethal disease - so you can only get so far by having a laser pointer that you can make reporters chase.
    I agree you re the scepticism re the founder's claim which is why I caveated it but it has come up in the Media trade press as an interesting discussion so I thought to highlight it.

    Yes, he's a master of distraction that's for sure (everyone had forgotten about the NYT taxes story after the first Presidential debate). Mind remembering though that, while we may think he dominated the news cycle with great stories in 2016, actually he had a lot of bad publicity (the tapes etc) where he was getting attention but none of it's positive. I think there is an element of looking back at 2016 and thinking his campaign was a masterpiece because he won but he actually had a fair few shockers.

    I really would recommend Jeff Rubin's book "The Expendables". When it boils down to it, he says, a lot of middle America feels the Establishment, including Obama, screwed them with NAFTA and free trade. Biden is linked to that.
Sign In or Register to comment.