CNN are awful right now, twice they have said let's give NV to Trump for 'giggles' to see if we can fine a way he wins the EV. Its like schoolkids! Yes Bidens leading but Trump could still win there so hardly 'giggles'. Awful journalism. Issue is that now Biden looks like winning they have gone full 'happy clappy' mode. I want Biden to win but part of me would love to see their faces if Trump won the EV due to NV just for giggles,,,,
Yes. Apparently he has Arizona and seems to have Wisconsion so he only needs another 20. Trump needs nearly 60.
That's the point. Yes, Biden still needs a moderate bit of luck somewhere. But Biden only needs to be lucky once. Trump needs to be (probably a bit more) lucky everywhere that's left.
But Ms Bingham — chair of the Vaccine Taskforce — said problems with ramping up manufacturing capacity meant the UK fell well short of this target. She predicted only 4million doses will be available before 2021.
Both Professor Pollard and Ms Bingham warned the first wave of vaccines would not be good enough to allow society to immediately return to normal, scuppering Boris Johnson's promise that 'life will return to normal next summer'.
Once a vaccine hits, people are going to go back to normal whatever scientists or a government say....
CNN are awful right now, twice they have said let's give NV to Trump for 'giggles' to see if we can fine a way he wins the EV. Its like schoolkids! Yes Bidens leading but Trump could still win there so hardly 'giggles'. Awful journalism. Issue is that now Biden looks like winning they have gone full 'happy clappy' mode. I want Biden to win but part of me would love to see their faces if Trump won the EV due to NV just for giggles,,,,
When they realised Trump was in with a chance last night, they instantly went into its voter suppression, COVID has made it totally unfair in favour of Trump....now we know huge turn out.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
Crikey, I mean is there a single conspiracy theory going that you don't sign up to in permanent red Sharpie ink?
Green ink shurely?
I dare say that's probably too conventional for our Lucky.
Yes, though he was 5 earlier. I'm not sure what's keeping him below 10 noiw. Will Betfair pay out on declared results, or will it sit back and await all possible legal actions over the next few months?
Whats keeping him below 10 is he still has a clear path , however hard, win GA, NC (likely), win PA (quite possible) and win AZ or NV (AZ very unlikely now, NV very close but most of whats left there should benefit Biden)
I'm not too proud to admit I was wrong - many if not most of the polls were also wrong and the strength of Trump's base greater than I had reckoned.
My first thought is not how much has changed but how little and it demonstrates how infrequent transformational elections are.
An initial glance - both Minnesota and New Hampshire saw 4% swings to the Democrats. The West is a Democrat stronghold with huge wins in California, Oregon and Washington. Colorado is now solidly Democrat but in New Mexico it was a smaller swing to Biden and he won by ten points.
Balancing the twenty safe Blue states are the twenty safe Red states - Biden got above 40% in only six of them and even with a uniform 5% additional swing the Democrats wouldn't win any of them.
In a sense, that symbolises the polarisation of the US body politic currently.
So to the eleven "marginal" or "swing" States. I thought Texas would be 2-4 points for Trump but he'd ended up six points ahead. Plenty on here thought Florida would be a hold for the Republicans and so it has proved with Trump extending his 2016 advantage. Ohio didn't move anywhere as much as I expected either and Iowa remains strongly Red.
We do of course have the mail-in ballots to come and it may be enough for Biden to get home but only just and far from the "wave" some, including me, had expected.
It remains to be seen how the Senate and Congressional races end up - it may be that, as I've observed, the more things change the more they stay the same. Obama had to live for a lot of his Presidency with a Senate in Republican hands and it may be Biden will have to learn the vices ad virtues of what the French call "co-habitation".
I suppose the only other observation I have at this time is that polarisation does not equal apathy. More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
On the wrongness, is it not also from a narrative on what was declared first, and the length of counting in the others, for example a breezy count of the rust belt with mail in first, before southwestern and southeastern battleground declared would have created a completely different narrative? Or a narrative from quickly knowing the whole result, with Biden 300+?
The main targets of Biden were the three key rust belt states, hold NV, gain AZ, Florida, NC and GA? For all the talk of polls being wrong, Biden might only miss out on one of those, and that just by margin matching tossup polls traditional in the sunshine state.
CNN are awful right now, twice they have said let's give NV to Trump for 'giggles' to see if we can fine a way he wins the EV. Its like schoolkids! Yes Bidens leading but Trump could still win there so hardly 'giggles'. Awful journalism. Issue is that now Biden looks like winning they have gone full 'happy clappy' mode. I want Biden to win but part of me would love to see their faces if Trump won the EV due to NV just for giggles,,,,
It’s been crap all night/day. But it always is. Trump is morally repugnant and I would not vote for him but it is despite the likes of CNN. They make you think he has a point
Misleading, Biden won the richest voters earning over $200k a year 47% to 43% for Trump and the poorest voters earning under $50k, Trump did best amongst middle income voters earning from $50k to $200k
$200k a year is middle income? You move in pretty exclusive circles!
Under $200k a year household income is middle income in the USA, 7% of households as the data shows of US voters have household income over $200k, a husband and a wife each earning £70,000 a year in the UK would have been on over $200 000 a year household income in US terms only a few years ago when you got $1.5 to the £1
A definition of middle income that goes up to the 93rd percentile is a pretty wide one. For symmetry it should start at the 7th percentile though, which I am guessing is some way below $50k/year. You are falling into the Daily Telegraph habit of labelling people as middle income who are actually in the richest 10% of the population. It is a common elitist mistake.
7% of British parents send their children to private school and that is a common cutoff for the upper middle class, I did not say middle class, 2 couples on median income voted for Trump when you look at their household income.
In the US the upper middle class vote Democrat on average as do the poor, just as in the UK the upper middle class are now disproportionally likely to vote LD or even for Starmer and the poorest voters tend to vote Labour, middle income voters in the UK vote Tory as middle income voters in the USA vote GOP
The best evidence available and correct me if I am wrong is that well-off areas still tend to vote Conservative and poorer areas Labour, except in around 120 metropolitan seats where race is a stronger predictor.
No the wealthiest areas in the UK now vote LD proportionally, of the LD seats they are now all well off and wealthy on the whole, from Oxford West and Abingdon to Richmond Park to St Albans and Bath and Kingston Upon Thames and Twickenham, the LDs have no working class seats like the Tories now have in the Red Wall or the Medway Towns or parts of Essex like Harlow and Thurrock.
The Lib Dems only have 11 seats out of 650 some of which aren't all that wealthy. How can they be said to be the representatives of wealthy Britain? Pains me to say it but they are a bit of a fringe. Did they get more votes than the Tories amongst the top 10% of the income scale? Or top 7% which I know you like to attach great significance to.
At election 2019 the Tories only got 40% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 43%, so they did worse than average with the richest voters. The LDs however got 20% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 11% so did better than average with the richest voters.
This US election was also only the second time in a post WW2 presidential election the Democratic candidate has beaten the Republican candidate with the richest voters, the other was 2008 when the highest earners voted for Obama-Biden over McCain-Palin, though they voted for Romney in 2012 comfortably and more narrowly for Trump in 2016
It depends how you define 'the richest voters'. The top 7% favoured Biden. But some would say the richest is the top 1% or 0.1%. It's possible that those percentiles favour Trump. I haven't seen the data. Your obsession with this seems strange but I suppose you simply define wealthy as being that category that shows they favour Biden over Trump - heaven fobid the numbers might conflict with your narrative.
These lawsuits are coming from a desperate man who knows he's lost. His gambit of declaring victory failed. Largely on the fact he did it off holding Florida. Which everyone knew wouldn't be decisive. Ironically had he left it a few hours it may have gained more traction.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
Crikey, I mean is there a single conspiracy theory going that you don't sign up to in permanent red Sharpie ink?
There are few that I wouldn't give a fair hearing to rather than dismissing out of hand, no.
As I said, I am far from convinced that if counts in Trump areas were being held up before suitcases full of late votes pushing Trump over the line showed up, that most here would not be behaving like ardent conspiracists too. It's only a wild conspiracy theory if it goes against your world view after all.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
Crikey, I mean is there a single conspiracy theory going that you don't sign up to in permanent red Sharpie ink?
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
I'm not too proud to admit I was wrong - many if not most of the polls were also wrong and the strength of Trump's base greater than I had reckoned.
My first thought is not how much has changed but how little and it demonstrates how infrequent transformational elections are.
An initial glance - both Minnesota and New Hampshire saw 4% swings to the Democrats. The West is a Democrat stronghold with huge wins in California, Oregon and Washington. Colorado is now solidly Democrat but in New Mexico it was a smaller swing to Biden and he won by ten points.
Balancing the twenty safe Blue states are the twenty safe Red states - Biden got above 40% in only six of them and even with a uniform 5% additional swing the Democrats wouldn't win any of them.
In a sense, that symbolises the polarisation of the US body politic currently.
So to the eleven "marginal" or "swing" States. I thought Texas would be 2-4 points for Trump but he'd ended up six points ahead. Plenty on here thought Florida would be a hold for the Republicans and so it has proved with Trump extending his 2016 advantage. Ohio didn't move anywhere as much as I expected either and Iowa remains strongly Red.
We do of course have the mail-in ballots to come and it may be enough for Biden to get home but only just and far from the "wave" some, including me, had expected.
It remains to be seen how the Senate and Congressional races end up - it may be that, as I've observed, the more things change the more they stay the same. Obama had to live for a lot of his Presidency with a Senate in Republican hands and it may be Biden will have to learn the vices ad virtues of what the French call "co-habitation".
I suppose the only other observation I have at this time is that polarisation does not equal apathy. More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
On the wrongness, is it not also from a narrative on what was declared first, and the length of counting in the others, for example a breezy count of the rust belt with mail in first, before southwestern and southeastern battleground declared would have created a completely different narrative? Or a narrative from quickly knowing the whole result, with Biden 300+?
The main targets of Biden were the three key rust belt states, hold NV, gain AZ, Florida, NC and GA? For all the talk of polls being wrong, Biden might only miss out on one of those, and that just by margin matching tossup polls traditional in the sunshine state.
I must admit that Ohio surprised me, I thought Biden would do better there that he ended up doing. Wasn't there a very late poll there by a highly rated local pollster that pretty much nailed the final result? I remember a few mentioning their polls were very good as very 'local ' based
I'm not too proud to admit I was wrong - many if not most of the polls were also wrong and the strength of Trump's base greater than I had reckoned.
My first thought is not how much has changed but how little and it demonstrates how infrequent transformational elections are.
An initial glance - both Minnesota and New Hampshire saw 4% swings to the Democrats. The West is a Democrat stronghold with huge wins in California, Oregon and Washington. Colorado is now solidly Democrat but in New Mexico it was a smaller swing to Biden and he won by ten points.
Balancing the twenty safe Blue states are the twenty safe Red states - Biden got above 40% in only six of them and even with a uniform 5% additional swing the Democrats wouldn't win any of them.
In a sense, that symbolises the polarisation of the US body politic currently.
So to the eleven "marginal" or "swing" States. I thought Texas would be 2-4 points for Trump but he'd ended up six points ahead. Plenty on here thought Florida would be a hold for the Republicans and so it has proved with Trump extending his 2016 advantage. Ohio didn't move anywhere as much as I expected either and Iowa remains strongly Red.
We do of course have the mail-in ballots to come and it may be enough for Biden to get home but only just and far from the "wave" some, including me, had expected.
It remains to be seen how the Senate and Congressional races end up - it may be that, as I've observed, the more things change the more they stay the same. Obama had to live for a lot of his Presidency with a Senate in Republican hands and it may be Biden will have to learn the vices ad virtues of what the French call "co-habitation".
I suppose the only other observation I have at this time is that polarisation does not equal apathy. More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
Yes, though he was 5 earlier. I'm not sure what's keeping him below 10 noiw. Will Betfair pay out on declared results, or will it sit back and await all possible legal actions over the next few months?
More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
The 2017 UKGE had the highest turnout of any UKGE since 1997, but that Parliament wasn't a happy time for the country.
There was a lot of talk about UK analogues for this election, and clearly it was not their version of 2019, but it could be 2017.
Biden is May, who won with a weaker than expected mandate, failed to govern effectively due to intransigence from the opposition and their own side.
Just so I can keep up, Trumps asked for a recount in Wisconsin and for voting to be stopped in MIchigan due to voter fraud? I wonder if he has a check list 'Things to do and states to do them to'
Delaying opponent declared winner as long as possible. Buying time. Keeping the narrative on the fraud not congrats to the winner.
They seemed very upset about Arizona declared against them, most of the pause was Trump Camp BS about their chances, that simply the same delaying tactic too.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
You've absolutely nailed it there Sir Norfolk.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
Misleading, Biden won the richest voters earning over $200k a year 47% to 43% for Trump and the poorest voters earning under $50k, Trump did best amongst middle income voters earning from $50k to $200k
$200k a year is middle income? You move in pretty exclusive circles!
Under $200k a year household income is middle income in the USA, 7% of households as the data shows of US voters have household income over $200k, a husband and a wife each earning £70,000 a year in the UK would have been on over $200 000 a year household income in US terms only a few years ago when you got $1.5 to the £1
A definition of middle income that goes up to the 93rd percentile is a pretty wide one. For symmetry it should start at the 7th percentile though, which I am guessing is some way below $50k/year. You are falling into the Daily Telegraph habit of labelling people as middle income who are actually in the richest 10% of the population. It is a common elitist mistake.
7% of British parents send their children to private school and that is a common cutoff for the upper middle class, I did not say middle class, 2 couples on median income voted for Trump when you look at their household income.
In the US the upper middle class vote Democrat on average as do the poor, just as in the UK the upper middle class are now disproportionally likely to vote LD or even for Starmer and the poorest voters tend to vote Labour, middle income voters in the UK vote Tory as middle income voters in the USA vote GOP
The best evidence available and correct me if I am wrong is that well-off areas still tend to vote Conservative and poorer areas Labour, except in around 120 metropolitan seats where race is a stronger predictor.
No the wealthiest areas in the UK now vote LD proportionally, of the LD seats they are now all well off and wealthy on the whole, from Oxford West and Abingdon to Richmond Park to St Albans and Bath and Kingston Upon Thames and Twickenham, the LDs have no working class seats like the Tories now have in the Red Wall or the Medway Towns or parts of Essex like Harlow and Thurrock.
The Lib Dems only have 11 seats out of 650 some of which aren't all that wealthy. How can they be said to be the representatives of wealthy Britain? Pains me to say it but they are a bit of a fringe. Did they get more votes than the Tories amongst the top 10% of the income scale? Or top 7% which I know you like to attach great significance to.
At election 2019 the Tories only got 40% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 43%, so they did worse than average with the richest voters. The LDs however got 20% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 11% so did better than average with the richest voters.
This US election was also only the second time in a post WW2 presidential election the Democratic candidate has beaten the Republican candidate with the richest voters, the other was 2008 when the highest earners voted for Obama-Biden over McCain-Palin, though they voted for Romney in 2012 comfortably and more narrowly for Trump in 2016
No, you're including the pensioners in that national vote share.
And? The very wealthiest pensioners will have a pension worth over £70,000 a year
Misleading, Biden won the richest voters earning over $200k a year 47% to 43% for Trump and the poorest voters earning under $50k, Trump did best amongst middle income voters earning from $50k to $200k
$200k a year is middle income? You move in pretty exclusive circles!
Under $200k a year household income is middle income in the USA, 7% of households as the data shows of US voters have household income over $200k, a husband and a wife each earning £70,000 a year in the UK would have been on over $200 000 a year household income in US terms only a few years ago when you got $1.5 to the £1
A definition of middle income that goes up to the 93rd percentile is a pretty wide one. For symmetry it should start at the 7th percentile though, which I am guessing is some way below $50k/year. You are falling into the Daily Telegraph habit of labelling people as middle income who are actually in the richest 10% of the population. It is a common elitist mistake.
7% of British parents send their children to private school and that is a common cutoff for the upper middle class, I did not say middle class, 2 couples on median income voted for Trump when you look at their household income.
In the US the upper middle class vote Democrat on average as do the poor, just as in the UK the upper middle class are now disproportionally likely to vote LD or even for Starmer and the poorest voters tend to vote Labour, middle income voters in the UK vote Tory as middle income voters in the USA vote GOP
The best evidence available and correct me if I am wrong is that well-off areas still tend to vote Conservative and poorer areas Labour, except in around 120 metropolitan seats where race is a stronger predictor.
No the wealthiest areas in the UK now vote LD proportionally, of the LD seats they are now all well off and wealthy on the whole, from Oxford West and Abingdon to Richmond Park to St Albans and Bath and Kingston Upon Thames and Twickenham, the LDs have no working class seats like the Tories now have in the Red Wall or the Medway Towns or parts of Essex like Harlow and Thurrock.
The Lib Dems only have 11 seats out of 650 some of which aren't all that wealthy. How can they be said to be the representatives of wealthy Britain? Pains me to say it but they are a bit of a fringe. Did they get more votes than the Tories amongst the top 10% of the income scale? Or top 7% which I know you like to attach great significance to.
At election 2019 the Tories only got 40% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 43%, so they did worse than average with the richest voters. The LDs however got 20% of voters earning over £70k compared to their national voteshare of 11% so did better than average with the richest voters.
This US election was also only the second time in a post WW2 presidential election the Democratic candidate has beaten the Republican candidate with the richest voters, the other was 2008 when the highest earners voted for Obama-Biden over McCain-Palin, though they voted for Romney in 2012 comfortably and more narrowly for Trump in 2016
It depends how you define 'the richest voters'. The top 7% favoured Biden. But some would say the richest is the top 1% or 0.1%. It's possible that those percentiles favour Trump. I haven't seen the data. Your obsession with this seems strange but I suppose you simply define wealthy as being that category that shows they favour Biden over Trump - heaven fobid the numbers might conflict with your narrative.
The wealthy is classified as the highest recorded earning category on the exit poll, currently those earning over $200k a year household income in the US or £70k a year in the UK
AZ is still in play, Fox and AP called it very early but no other major networks. Its good for him right now but I'd prefer one or two other calls for it before I relax.
Mail in ballots that are postmarked on or before election day get counted. There are probably 100,000 of these and they lean heavily Democrat (see 2018). This means that it is extremely unlikely that Biden does not win Nevada. Fox News Decision Desk said it would take a "four standard deviation event" for it not to be Biden.
Now, would I go with 4 standard deviation? No. But I think it's well under a 10% chance that President Trump holds Arizona.
Robert do you mean Arizona in your second sentence?
Arizona called by Fox and PA in what feels like another day ago. It’s only Team Trump pressure that’s kept it open?
Yes, though he was 5 earlier. I'm not sure what's keeping him below 10 noiw. Will Betfair pay out on declared results, or will it sit back and await all possible legal actions over the next few months?
Legal actions won't play out over a "few months". Under state law, votes need to be certified by various dates in late November and early December. If they are certified, that's the result. If they're not the particular markets are surely void. What definitely can't happen is that they are certified in March next year - if we reach the deadline for certification and they aren't certified, that's it - any legal ruling is then entirely moot.
In reality, they will all be certified. Any legal action to require or prevent certification will simply be accelerated through the appeals process to match the electoral timetable.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
You've absolutely nailed it there Sir Norfolk.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
Agreed. Trumps mentality is really showing here. It's become 'someone has stolen my toys I want them back'. I think most people suspected that if he looked like losing and it was even remotely close, and its clearly going to be that, Trump was going to react like this. And the point made about some (not all) of his supporters to 'stand by' and 'this is a war we can win' rhetoric is scary
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
AZ is still in play, Fox and AP called it very early but no other major networks. Its good for him right now but I'd prefer one or two other calls for it before I relax.
Mail in ballots that are postmarked on or before election day get counted. There are probably 100,000 of these and they lean heavily Democrat (see 2018). This means that it is extremely unlikely that Biden does not win Nevada. Fox News Decision Desk said it would take a "four standard deviation event" for it not to be Biden.
Now, would I go with 4 standard deviation? No. But I think it's well under a 10% chance that President Trump holds Arizona.
Robert do you mean Arizona in your second sentence?
Arizona called by Fox and PA in what feels like another day ago. It’s only Team Trump pressure that’s kept it open?
CNN have just gone through it and basically reflected exactly what @rcs1000 was saying – it's a done deal.
But Ms Bingham — chair of the Vaccine Taskforce — said problems with ramping up manufacturing capacity meant the UK fell well short of this target. She predicted only 4million doses will be available before 2021.
Both Professor Pollard and Ms Bingham warned the first wave of vaccines would not be good enough to allow society to immediately return to normal, scuppering Boris Johnson's promise that 'life will return to normal next summer'.
Nobody knows how good they are until the trial data are released.
As for Ms Bingham, she has a bachelor's science degree, an MBA and a career in investment management. God knows who thought it would be a good idea to give her this job - apart from her husband, of course, who is a Tory minister.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
You've absolutely nailed it there Sir Norfolk.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
And i suspect that actually a lot of GOP politicians are probably worried about it, actually.
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
Go with approximately 97048. It adds a certain frission
More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
The 2017 UKGE had the highest turnout of any UKGE since 1997, but that Parliament wasn't a happy time for the country.
There was a lot of talk about UK analogues for this election, and clearly it was not their version of 2019, but it could be 2017.
Biden is May, who won with a weaker than expected mandate, failed to govern effectively due to intransigence from the opposition and their own side.
The expectations were garbage based 100% on junk polls (in 2020 at least).
I'm not too proud to admit I was wrong - many if not most of the polls were also wrong and the strength of Trump's base greater than I had reckoned.
My first thought is not how much has changed but how little and it demonstrates how infrequent transformational elections are.
An initial glance - both Minnesota and New Hampshire saw 4% swings to the Democrats. The West is a Democrat stronghold with huge wins in California, Oregon and Washington. Colorado is now solidly Democrat but in New Mexico it was a smaller swing to Biden and he won by ten points.
Balancing the twenty safe Blue states are the twenty safe Red states - Biden got above 40% in only six of them and even with a uniform 5% additional swing the Democrats wouldn't win any of them.
In a sense, that symbolises the polarisation of the US body politic currently.
So to the eleven "marginal" or "swing" States. I thought Texas would be 2-4 points for Trump but he'd ended up six points ahead. Plenty on here thought Florida would be a hold for the Republicans and so it has proved with Trump extending his 2016 advantage. Ohio didn't move anywhere as much as I expected either and Iowa remains strongly Red.
We do of course have the mail-in ballots to come and it may be enough for Biden to get home but only just and far from the "wave" some, including me, had expected.
It remains to be seen how the Senate and Congressional races end up - it may be that, as I've observed, the more things change the more they stay the same. Obama had to live for a lot of his Presidency with a Senate in Republican hands and it may be Biden will have to learn the vices ad virtues of what the French call "co-habitation".
I suppose the only other observation I have at this time is that polarisation does not equal apathy. More Americans than ever have voted at these elections and some might argue that represents a triumph of the democratic process as a whole. For better or worse, more are engaged and is that such a bad thing for the future?
On the wrongness, is it not also from a narrative on what was declared first, and the length of counting in the others, for example a breezy count of the rust belt with mail in first, before southwestern and southeastern battleground declared would have created a completely different narrative? Or a narrative from quickly knowing the whole result, with Biden 300+?
The main targets of Biden were the three key rust belt states, hold NV, gain AZ, Florida, NC and GA? For all the talk of polls being wrong, Biden might only miss out on one of those, and that just by margin matching tossup polls traditional in the sunshine state.
I must admit that Ohio surprised me, I thought Biden would do better there that he ended up doing. Wasn't there a very late poll there by a highly rated local pollster that pretty much nailed the final result? I remember a few mentioning their polls were very good as very 'local ' based
Just so I can keep up, Trumps asked for a recount in Wisconsin and for voting to be stopped in MIchigan due to voter fraud? I wonder if he has a check list 'Things to do and states to do them to'
asked for a recount in Wisconsin and for voting to be stopped in MIchigan
Asked for counts to continue in other places where he is behind AZ/NV but for it to be deemed illegal in the State he is ahead PA
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
Go with approximately 97048. It adds a certain frission
I think the key phrase there and why I'm not totally confident about PA is 'depends on districts' in some yes he will win 72/27 and even more but I think there are enough trump counties where even though Biden wins the postals it may not be as high. Hoping I'm wrong but thats my worry
AZ is still in play, Fox and AP called it very early but no other major networks. Its good for him right now but I'd prefer one or two other calls for it before I relax.
Mail in ballots that are postmarked on or before election day get counted. There are probably 100,000 of these and they lean heavily Democrat (see 2018). This means that it is extremely unlikely that Biden does not win Nevada. Fox News Decision Desk said it would take a "four standard deviation event" for it not to be Biden.
Now, would I go with 4 standard deviation? No. But I think it's well under a 10% chance that President Trump holds Arizona.
Robert do you mean Arizona in your second sentence?
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
I posted some polling earlier.
Amongst Trump voters who support mask wearing the overwhelming majority of them think Trump supports mask wearing as well.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
Crikey, I mean is there a single conspiracy theory going that you don't sign up to in permanent red Sharpie ink?
There are few that I wouldn't give a fair hearing to rather than dismissing out of hand, no.
As I said, I am far from convinced that if counts in Trump areas were being held up before suitcases full of late votes pushing Trump over the line showed up, that most here would not be behaving like ardent conspiracists too. It's only a wild conspiracy theory if it goes against your world view after all.
That is just nonsense. Postal votes come in all elections; both sides get to scrutinise the ballots. That’s how it works.
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
Go with approximately 97048. It adds a certain frission
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Basically all the Hispanics think Biden is a Communist.
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Things like wokeness and *defund the police* are incredibly unpopular with ‘some’ BAME voters, who see them as patronizing, even racist, and downright dangerous; enough, perhaps, to get some to shift from Dem to Rep?
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
Go with approximately 97048. It adds a certain frission
I think the key phrase there and why I'm not totally confident about PA is 'depends on districts' in some yes he will win 72/27 and even more but I think there are enough trump counties where even though Biden wins the postals it may not be as high. Hoping I'm wrong but thats my worry
Twitter have given Trump the naughty mark for some tweets.
As someone rightly noted above, I guess we all have to accept we’re just not the audience for this crap.
Even though we know what Trump is like its taken something like this to see him in all his glory. I feel sorry for americans right now , not because it looks like Biden may well win now but because god only knows what Trump will do now until he is marched away.
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Basically all the Hispanics think Biden is a Communist.
Isn't that just those from Cuban and Venezuelan background?
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
According to one poster here, the Republican camp has feared for some time that the Democrats would attempt to steal the election using the postal voting system. Because DT is such a big bogeyman, we're ascribing every dark motive to him, and every innocent one to his opponents. The reality is surely more of a vicious high stakes political struggle where losing is not an option for either side.
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Trump’s success in Florida with Latino voters is interesting. GOP have clearly managed to sow the seeds of doubt about OMG SOCIALISM with people who fled Cubs/Venezuela.
Dems need to think seriously about their appeal with this demographic - Beto O’Rourke speaking 8th grade Spanish isn’t going to cut it.
Twitter have given Trump the naughty mark for some tweets.
As someone rightly noted above, I guess we all have to accept we’re just not the audience for this crap.
Even though we know what Trump is like its taken something like this to see him in all his glory. I feel sorry for americans right now , not because it looks like Biden may well win now but because god only knows what Trump will do now until he is marched away.
Yes a long transition is only risk free if the incumbent is a normal human being.
Postal votes splitting 72/27 in Biden's favour. Depends on district I suppose but 1.2m votes would mean another 864k for Biden and 318k for Trump. Depends on the districts though. 546k swing would see Biden home.
Please correct the maths if I'm wrong on this.
Yup, on that maths Biden wins quite handily – by 97,048 votes I think?? Is this right?? (apologies for the over precision)
Go with approximately 97048. It adds a certain frission
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
You've absolutely nailed it there Sir Norfolk.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
And i suspect that actually a lot of GOP politicians are probably worried about it, actually.
Yes. A few are already distancing themselves, and others keeping as quiet as possible.
Indeed, Pence distanced himself immediately as he's got an eye on 2024 win or lose and has calculated his route out of the Fuhrerbunker in readiness for petrol starting to be poured about. He's an astute man and was invited by Trump to back his "won easily and the rest is fraud" line when it was delivered. He didn't say "bullsh1t boss" but very deliberately struck a totally different tone.
Listening to all the vibes, Biden is likely to win WI, MI, PA, NV, AZ and GA, taking him to a handy 306 I believe.
Trump's disinformation shenanigans will seem rather pointless by then.
I'd be very happy with that but both PA and GA for me are toss ups , I think GA may be very very close but not quite, PA, Id love to see Biden overturn that lead Trump has now just for the Trump reaction but I feel Biden may just fall short
But Ms Bingham — chair of the Vaccine Taskforce — said problems with ramping up manufacturing capacity meant the UK fell well short of this target. She predicted only 4million doses will be available before 2021.
Both Professor Pollard and Ms Bingham warned the first wave of vaccines would not be good enough to allow society to immediately return to normal, scuppering Boris Johnson's promise that 'life will return to normal next summer'.
Once a vaccine hits, people are going to go back to normal whatever scientists or a government say....
100% right.
As soon as we have a working vaccine, it's all over. Psychologically if not physically.
And the former is far more important at this stage.
trump contesting Wisconsin. Claiming irregularities in several counties
He's just talking about the "vote dump" stuff he's seen on twitter. He'll believe anything he sees on there. For somebody who goes on and on about "fake news" he's incredibly bad at actually spotting it when he sees it.
Eh? You really think that he isn't saying it because his campaign/legal team etc. is advising him that's what to do? What an interesting view of the workings of politics.
You think his campaign/legal team approved of his "victory claim" last night? Pence had to make a statement to contain the damage. Trump says what Trump says, generally unconstrained by what his advisers tell him. And i think he probably does think he's being cheated. I don't think he really understands the electoral process.
He may very well -be- being cheated. Do you think the Dems wouldn't be raising hell if the situation was reversed?
As for the header, Republicans may be responsible for the electoral loophole that may be being fraudulently exploited, but that doesn't carry the same moral culpability as actually exploiting it.
They'd not be meek about it, but Trump is playing a different game here.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
You've absolutely nailed it there Sir Norfolk.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
And i suspect that actually a lot of GOP politicians are probably worried about it, actually.
Yes. A few are already distancing themselves, and others keeping as quiet as possible.
Indeed, Pence distanced himself immediately as he's got an eye on 2024 win or lose and has calculated his route out of the Fuhrerbunker in readiness for petrol starting to be poured about. He's an astute man and was invited by Trump to back his "won easily and the rest is fraud" line when it was delivered. He didn't say "bullsh1t boss" but very deliberately struck a totally different tone.
As far as the likes of Mitch McConnell is concerned Trump's done his job - 3 Supreme Court Judges. I don't think he'll take any shit from him for the next 3 months. Also has his six year term secured so doesn't need to pander to him.
Just so I can keep up, Trumps asked for a recount in Wisconsin and for voting to be stopped in MIchigan due to voter fraud? I wonder if he has a check list 'Things to do and states to do them to'
asked for a recount in Wisconsin and for voting to be stopped in MIchigan
Asked for counts to continue in other places where he is behind AZ/NV but for it to be deemed illegal in the State he is ahead PA
Apart from that he is being completely consistent
Still, at least he has to pay $3m for the Wisconsin recount. (Though if he stays true to form he’ll stiff them on the bill.)
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
I think monolithic ethnic votes gradually tend towards thr general population, which is a good thing as it shows integration making progress (though it's slow going in the US). The same in the UK - it used to be true that if you canvassed someone non-white you could be confident they'd promise a Labour vote, but nowadays that really isn't the case. You have to argue the case, just like with everyone else - it's inconvenient but healthy. The reverse has happened with class - you can'r assume that because someone has a posh house and car they're going to be Tories.
Trump, I would think, appeals to some robust working-class men of any ethnicity, who might findf Biden's fatherly approach a bit feeble.
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Trump is an American nationalist rather than a white supremacist. The woke analysis is that ethnic minorities are voting for him because he offers a "path to whiteness", and that they themselves have been corrupted by internalised white supremacy, but this is extremely patronising. In a way it's also curiously anti-immigrant: "We don't want people comin' over 'ere, tellin' us we're the greatest country in the world."
But Ms Bingham — chair of the Vaccine Taskforce — said problems with ramping up manufacturing capacity meant the UK fell well short of this target. She predicted only 4million doses will be available before 2021.
Both Professor Pollard and Ms Bingham warned the first wave of vaccines would not be good enough to allow society to immediately return to normal, scuppering Boris Johnson's promise that 'life will return to normal next summer'.
Nobody knows how good they are until the trial data are released.
As for Ms Bingham, she has a bachelor's science degree, an MBA and a career in investment management. God knows who thought it would be a good idea to give her this job - apart from her husband, of course, who is a Tory minister.
A degree in biochemistry and a career in biotech investment. I think that's probably relevant experience, if the job is to speak to biotech companies?
Delaying opponent declared winner as long as possible. Buying time. Keeping the narrative on the fraud not congrats to the winner.
They seemed very upset about Arizona declared against them, most of the pause was Trump Camp BS about their chances, that simply the same delaying tactic too.
But has he suggested a remedy in his legal filings? "Stop counting, because there's so much fraud" kinda points to a revote, because if you don't count how many ballots you're saying were fraudulent then you can't say whether there were enough of them to have had an effect on the result, in which case in the interests of fairness you should have another vote. (Alternatively you can just send the Securitate or Tonton Macoutes round to your opponent's house to sort him out for good, which is probably what Trump would prefer.) Sounds to me as if this weak and neurotic man is ever more desperately in need of some people he can swish past as he hears them say (regardless of whether they're actually saying it) that he's the winner, the greatest, the greatest winningest winner in history. "I'll get my lawyers on to you!" (It's still chuckleworthy that he told Theresa May to sue the EU.) I can't see Trump staying in office until noon on 21 January, or at least not as acting president. (The PredictIt market puts the probability at 85%. Surprised it's still so high.)
In Alabama, 2,123,372 voted in 2016 and 2,279,481 this time which is a 7.4% increase in votes cast.
In Ohio, 5.496.487 voted in 2016 but it's likely something like 6,270,000 votes will be counted this time which would be a 12.4% increase in the number of votes.
In Wisconsin, 2,976,150 voted in 2016 and 3,297.137 votes have been counted this time which is a 9.7% increase.
Assume 10% for Pennsylvania and you'd be expecting around 6,782,000 votes to be cast.
So far, according to the BBC results, 5,775,174 votes have been cast so there could well be another million votes out there. if the remaining million votes split about 3:1 for Biden he could still win the state but that's the size of the task.
Over the last 24 hours I have been nothing but calmness and sereneness personified.
I genuinely have as to me it seems the perfect result with Biden winning, Trump gone, but also Biden restricted by the Senate while the Republicans hopefully can find a sane candidate to go forward
In terms of Trump's base, I was quite shocked to read that Trump has made inroads into every other ethnicity while losing the support of white men.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
The loss of support among white men has been evident for ages in the polling. My theory on this isn't perhaps very original - I think some white men couldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because she was a woman but could vote for the male Joe Biden.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
Trump’s success in Florida with Latino voters is interesting. GOP have clearly managed to sow the seeds of doubt about OMG SOCIALISM with people who fled Cubs/Venezuela.
Dems need to think seriously about their appeal with this demographic - Beto O’Rourke speaking 8th grade Spanish isn’t going to cut it.
On Twitter @thegrugq, who is a very astute infosec/cyberwar expert, was saying that there's been a huge amount of targetted Spanish-language material on Facebook etc and nothing to counter it. For English-speaking voters you have a lot of sources of information, so when you see an ad saying Trump would defund the police, it's countered by Biden himself and potentially other media saying lol no, Trump made that up. But if you don't follow English media it may be harder to get that balance.
Unless PAs blue heartlands break in odd Florida style way*
The actual result is no worse for Biden than AZ, MI, NV, WI, PA That works. The other two are not out of question either. Biden no longer has a Trump problem, the GOP have the Trump problem.
*maybe not odd, both candidates getting adopted home state advantage
Unless PAs blue heartlands break in odd Florida style way*
The actual result is no worse for Biden than AZ, MI, NV, WI, PA That works. The other two are not out of question either. Biden no longer has a Trump problem, the GOP have the Trump problem.
*maybe not odd, both candidates getting adopted home state advantage
In Alabama, 2,123,372 voted in 2016 and 2,279,481 this time which is a 7.4% increase in votes cast.
In Ohio, 5.496.487 voted in 2016 but it's likely something like 6,270,000 votes will be counted this time which would be a 12.4% increase in the number of votes.
In Wisconsin, 2,976,150 voted in 2016 and 3,297.137 votes have been counted this time which is a 9.7% increase.
Assume 10% for Pennsylvania and you'd be expecting around 6,782,000 votes to be cast.
So far, according to the BBC results, 5,775,174 votes have been cast so there could well be another million votes out there. if the remaining million votes split about 3:1 for Biden he could still win the state but that's the size of the task.
That's pretty how much how I see PA. I think there was a number given earlier of 1.2 million votes left. He will win 3 to 1 in a lot of places maybe even higher in Philli. But my worry is that there are enough Trump counties in PA with votes still to be counted that even if Biden wins the postal votes it wont be 3 to 1 there so he will fall short
Comments
If they thought they were going to carry all of NV, PA, GA they wouldn't be doing this I don't think.
Jen O'Malley Dillon effectively conceded NC but she seems to think they are competitive in GA and PA...
The main targets of Biden were the three key rust belt states, hold NV, gain AZ, Florida, NC and GA? For all the talk of polls being wrong, Biden might only miss out on one of those, and that just by margin matching tossup polls traditional in the sunshine state.
His gambit of declaring victory failed. Largely on the fact he did it off holding Florida. Which everyone knew wouldn't be decisive.
Ironically had he left it a few hours it may have gained more traction.
As I said, I am far from convinced that if counts in Trump areas were being held up before suitcases full of late votes pushing Trump over the line showed up, that most here would not be behaving like ardent conspiracists too. It's only a wild conspiracy theory if it goes against your world view after all.
The traditional approach in a close election (and indeed the Pence approach) is to say "this is all terribly close, and we are going to make sure votes are counted, and counted fairly, so that everyone can be assured the result, when it is finalised and whichever way it goes, is accurate and fair".
Now there's a large dose of cant in there because what you're actually doing is ensuring YOUR votes are counted (and let the other guy worry about HIS votes). But it's not seeking to undermine confidence in the system, and your aim at the end is to emerge - hopefully victorious and with confidence in the system reasonably intact.
Trump's not doing that. His immediate line was that he'd actually won easily, and anything you see that goes against that is a lie and a fraud. He's then running around, casting shade and claiming fraud totally regardless of whether there's an underlying concern or it's just an internet-assembled lie from maniacs. He's doing that in the full knowledge that some of his supporters are fanatical people,who he told to "stand back... and stand by". It is beyond reckless, and entirely about his ego with no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the democratic system in the USA (because what's that to do with Donald's personal pleasure?)
It ain't over.
I had started to see him as a white supremacist, based on his comments while in power. But the polls seem to contradict this.
It's something I'm having trouble understanding. Trump's base isn't just stronger. It appears to be more diverse.
Not done it yet
There was a lot of talk about UK analogues for this election, and clearly it was not their version of 2019, but it could be 2017.
Biden is May, who won with a weaker than expected mandate, failed to govern effectively due to intransigence from the opposition and their own side.
As discussed AZ is also a projected gain by AP!!
But we have done this – someone tell Nate
They seemed very upset about Arizona declared against them, most of the pause was Trump Camp BS about their chances, that simply the same delaying tactic too.
I would add that nyone on here defending Trump's behaviour is either very stupid or as amoral as Trump (or both).
Legal actions won't play out over a "few months". Under state law, votes need to be certified by various dates in late November and early December. If they are certified, that's the result. If they're not the particular markets are surely void. What definitely can't happen is that they are certified in March next year - if we reach the deadline for certification and they aren't certified, that's it - any legal ruling is then entirely moot.
In reality, they will all be certified. Any legal action to require or prevent certification will simply be accelerated through the appeals process to match the electoral timetable.
He knows.
Twitter have given Trump the naughty mark for some tweets.
It would be ironic if a progressive ticket won because of the votes of misogynists but that's politics for you.
As for Trump's improved performance among Hispanics and African-Americans, I find that harder to resolve. There is an appeal to generations who have voted Democrat and seemingly not nothing out of it - it's not unlike the conundrum Labour has faced over here.
The bit I struggle with is so much of what Trump promised in 2016 and has promised since hasn't been delivered. No one seems able or willing to hold him account for what he hasn't done (quite apart from what he has) and why he hasn't done it.
So why don't they call it? FFS!
As for Ms Bingham, she has a bachelor's science degree, an MBA and a career in investment management. God knows who thought it would be a good idea to give her this job - apart from her husband, of course, who is a Tory minister.
No, and in fact I'm still interested in GA.
Asked for counts to continue in other places where he is behind AZ/NV but for it to be deemed illegal in the State he is ahead PA
Apart from that he is being completely consistent
Good luck to him, I think he's going to need it.
They can un-board the cities now.
Amongst Trump voters who support mask wearing the overwhelming majority of them think Trump supports mask wearing as well.
I mean, Fox's Decision Desk is awesome – it is not going to call a state for Biden unless it's sure. This is Fox – Fox! – FFS.
Postal votes come in all elections; both sides get to scrutinise the ballots. That’s how it works.
Suitcases ?
‘Just a thought.
To me he has a 25% chance in Nevada and a 50% chance in PA
So a 12.5% of being President
248 says AP.
Michigan 16 and Biden is at 264, Nevada puts him 270, then Pennsylvania puts him 290? Seems fairly possible to me
Dems need to think seriously about their appeal with this demographic - Beto O’Rourke speaking 8th grade Spanish isn’t going to cut it.
Trump's disinformation shenanigans will seem rather pointless by then.
Indeed, Pence distanced himself immediately as he's got an eye on 2024 win or lose and has calculated his route out of the Fuhrerbunker in readiness for petrol starting to be poured about. He's an astute man and was invited by Trump to back his "won easily and the rest is fraud" line when it was delivered. He didn't say "bullsh1t boss" but very deliberately struck a totally different tone.
As soon as we have a working vaccine, it's all over. Psychologically if not physically.
And the former is far more important at this stage.
(Though if he stays true to form he’ll stiff them on the bill.)
Trump, I would think, appeals to some robust working-class men of any ethnicity, who might findf Biden's fatherly approach a bit feeble.
The shepherds have been furloughed.
The Inn keeper has shut under tier 3 regulations and had a slump in bookings.
Santa won't be working as he would break the rule of 6 with Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Donner, and Blitzen.
As for Rudolph, with that red nose, he should be isolating and taking a test.
She's certainly much better qualified than Dido.
'BREAKING: Coronavirus-mutation from minks are found in Humans. Immediate lockdowns in regions across Denmark. All minks will be killed by the authorities.'
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/alle-danske-mink-skal-aflives-af-frygt-virusmutation
In Alabama, 2,123,372 voted in 2016 and 2,279,481 this time which is a 7.4% increase in votes cast.
In Ohio, 5.496.487 voted in 2016 but it's likely something like 6,270,000 votes will be counted this time which would be a 12.4% increase in the number of votes.
In Wisconsin, 2,976,150 voted in 2016 and 3,297.137 votes have been counted this time which is a 9.7% increase.
Assume 10% for Pennsylvania and you'd be expecting around 6,782,000 votes to be cast.
So far, according to the BBC results, 5,775,174 votes have been cast so there could well be another million votes out there. if the remaining million votes split about 3:1 for Biden he could still win the state but that's the size of the task.
Unless PAs blue heartlands break in odd Florida style way*
The actual result is no worse for Biden than AZ, MI, NV, WI, PA
That works. The other two are not out of question either.
Biden no longer has a Trump problem, the GOP have the Trump problem.
*maybe not odd, both candidates getting adopted home state advantage
I almost confused you with LadyG a couple of times.