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 wouldnt be any more than 50/50 on PA
Hope I am wrong
Biden really needs AZ/NV and PA to put a stop to Trump shenanigans
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.
HY identifies the conclusion first and draws the line after.
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.
No, what happened was that Trump very deliberately sowed the "if I lose, it'll be fraud", not in any way due to genuine concern but rather as an insurance policy that he is now claiming against.
Most Republican politicians don't share that, and are distancing themselves from it either directly, by silence, or by recasting in the more traditional "all votes must count equally" way. They don't believe there's widespread fraud, still have the Senate, know Biden is a moderate, and are content to wait four years and go again (and indeed only two years for the House). They'll wait and see if a route remains through counting the votes, and if it all turns on razor-fine recounts in Nevada or whatever they'll see if it might be saved, but have absolutely no intention of joining that madman in the Fuhrerbunker, ranting and raving about fraud and betrayal while it all slips inevitably away.
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.
I'd be a lot more sympathetic to that view if it was not combined with aggressive closing of polling stations in lower income and minority areas.
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
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.
The lazy explanation is the social conservatism of many minorities. Whether this stacks up I don’t know.
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
I had this very conversation with a black person who said he would have voted for Trump a few days ago.
His answer was simple.
‘Because I like him. I like how he says outrageous things and annoys people. I like how he isn’t afraid of anything. I like his views on many things as well.’
Now, I may think that person wasmaking a strange choice. Indeed, I did, although I didn’t show it (after all, he’s entitled to his views). But a lot of African Americans are of course Christians, and perhaps not wholly enthused by a liberal agenda that Biden represents.
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.
HY identifies the conclusion first and draws the line after.
Isn't he just showing the part of the chart @SouthamObserver left out in order to make the claim that the richest voted Trump? I dont think @HYUFD opened up the topic
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.
Nate Cohn projecting Biden will lead in PA by the end of the election.
If Biden gets PA there is literally no way back for Trump unless he pulls off a miracle in MI (which has pretty much certainly gone for Biden) NV and AZ would not save him.
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.
The lazy explanation is the social conservatism of many minorities. Whether this stacks up I don’t know.
The ethnic minorities in Canada (particularly recent arrivals) are a strong part of the Conservative base. This is generally ascribed to social conservatism.
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.
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
I take it Trump will not be demanding these votes aren't counted?
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.
The lazy explanation is the social conservatism of many minorities. Whether this stacks up I don’t know.
I recall watching the video made by Kim Klacik in Baltimore. She lost 72-28 by the way. The theme was that the Democrats had controlled Baltimore for decades but the lot of the average African-American hadn't changed. Problems with crime and drugs were endemic and the message was the simplistic but attractive "it can't go on like this".
We know about the staggering levels of gun crime and violence among the young African-American communities across the States and whether it's gang-related or drug-related the instance of violent death among young black males is heart-breaking.
Do Democrat administrations cause this? Not entirely - it's a much complex set of issues around culture, economic opportunity as well as role models, self-esteem and similar. I don't see how a Republican administration in Baltimore would change much of that but the notion a sense of frustration and anger couldn't manifest itself in a change of politics is realistic.
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.
HY identifies the conclusion first and draws the line after.
Isn't he just showing the part of the chart @SouthamObserver left out in order to make the claim that the richest voted Trump? I dont think @HYUFD opened up the topic
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
I take it Trump will not be demanding these votes aren't counted?
Have missed all the excitement over last 24 hours, but was underwhelmed by this morning's BBC coverage.
Trump appears to have a strong motive for questioning the numbers of votes cast by Democrats, as does Biden with votes cast for Republicans. Am sure that this year's result is as clean as Kennedy's narrow victory in 1960.
Nate Cohn projecting Biden will lead in PA by the end of the election.
If Biden gets PA there is literally no way back for Trump unless he pulls of a miracle in MI. NV and AZ would not save him.
So you're ruling out Trump winning California?
Did you see my post about Dimbleby saying exactly that on election night years ago?
Told by Bob Worcester (IIRC) that Obama had won, Dimbleby refused to call the election for Obama because the polls were still open in CA and he was "assuming" that Cali would vote Democrat.
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
I take it Trump will not be demanding these votes aren't counted?
Depends what’s on them? Perhaps the republicans want a clearing house facility where they can pre-vet them as they come in.
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
If you have 1000 random people they are going to share a wide range of views regardless of their race. It would be surprising if Trump was winning the majority of the black vote given his musings, but not a surprise that he is winning some black voters or that its improved off a very low base. Regression to the mean is a big factor when he did as badly as he did with them in 2016.
As with our own PM, Trump is a master of appearing all things to anyone willing to listen him. There are plenty of parts of his character that will have broad appeal, anti-establishment, successful business, f***-em attitude, misogynist, racist to other groups (there will be hispanics who dislike blacks and vice versa remember, race isnt solely white vs the rest), and most importantly a track record on the economy and stock market.
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
One theory:
Plenty of people aren't sufficiently politically engaged for either of those quotes to have made a huge impact on them. Plus you need to know the context, and reject the spin offered by his supporters, to get why they are so vile.
In 2016, on the other hand, there was no missing or misunderstanding "Build the Wall", which was the biggest theme of his campaign. Well he didn't build it, and it hasn't been a campaign issue this time around.
Not hard to imagine a Hispanic Republican voting blue, or not voting, in 2016 but red this year.
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.
So how is it done now? A delegation go to see Trump and leave revolver on his desk? Something similar to night before Maggie resigned?
It does need his phone call to Joe and support to transitioning?
Actually more Democrats than Republicans bought guns ahead of the election. Many new gun owners.
Democrats have bought a load of guns and then vote for a party to take them away again?
Only in America.
The Democrats aren't for repeal of the second amendment. 🤦🏻♂️
Biden was reasonably vocal about restricting the use of rifles (used primarily by white GOPers) but less so about handguns (used by young black urban dem voters to blow other young black urban dem voters away with depressing regularity). His vote share with white guys went up and his vote share with black guys went down.
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
I take it Trump will not be demanding these votes aren't counted?
Indeed.. on a serious note NV is dicy now, earlier today there were supposed to be a large chunk of Clark County post in votes still to be counted (which would favour Biden a lot), however it now turns out whats left are the drop in on the day votes in the boxes at the centres and those have heavily favoured Rs. So I hope those PBers on here confident about Biden overturning that big defecit in PA are right. As if not NV could give Trump the WH keys again
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
I had this very conversation with a black person who said he would have voted for Trump a few days ago.
His answer was simple.
‘Because I like him. I like how he says outrageous things and annoys people. I like how he isn’t afraid of anything. I like his views on many things as well.’
Now, I may think that person wasmaking a strange choice. Indeed, I did, although I didn’t show it (after all, he’s entitled to his views). But a lot of African Americans are of course Christians, and perhaps not wholly enthused by a liberal agenda that Biden represents.
That African Americans are more likely to be Christians and that Hispanics are more likely to be anti-communist are theories I could get behind.
But.
Biden is no more radical or left wing than Hillary was, so why would Trump's vote share be up with them this time around (unless the culture wars have had a strongly polarising effect).
I think there are plenty of theories that partially fit but no one obvious answer.
For me it remains the surprise of the night. If a bookie was offering odds on Trump's vote being down from 2016 with white men but up from all other ethnic groups, how many of us would have taken it? It sounds so bizarre and counterintuitive to the narrative of the last four years, I wouldn't have taken that bet at 200/1.
Am still concerned about Nevada,there seems to be a chunk of drop off votes (into boxes) on the day, Reps did very well earlier with them, and theres still quite a lot more to do, it also looks like mail in votes are almost all done. Ralston is very up to date on this , I trust his numbers and views far more than reporters from CNN or Fox https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840 What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
I take it Trump will not be demanding these votes aren't counted?
Indeed.. on a serious note NV is dicy now, earlier today there were supposed to be a large chunk of Clark County post in votes still to be counted (which would favour Biden a lot), however it now turns out whats left are the drop in on the day votes in the boxes at the centres and those have heavily favoured Rs. So I hope those PBers on here confident about Biden overturning that big defecit in PA are right. As if not NV could give Trump the WH keys again
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
If the Democrats are smart, they will start working from day 1 on a plan to win in 2024, that means appealing to all of those that have trended away, e.g. Hispanics
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
If the Democrats are smart, they will start working from day 1 on a plan to win in 2024, that means appealing to all of those that have trended away, e.g. Hispanics
In which case they would need to become fervently anti the Cuban Communist one party state government, it was Cuban Latinos who swung most to Trump especially in Florida as they fear anything remotely like the socialism they fled from
Do I correctly remember Nevada saying no more results until tomorrow? Just thinking sequencing. If the above comments are correct, it’ll become a bit of a story later I guess?
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
I had this very conversation with a black person who said he would have voted for Trump a few days ago.
His answer was simple.
‘Because I like him. I like how he says outrageous things and annoys people. I like how he isn’t afraid of anything. I like his views on many things as well.’
Now, I may think that person wasmaking a strange choice. Indeed, I did, although I didn’t show it (after all, he’s entitled to his views). But a lot of African Americans are of course Christians, and perhaps not wholly enthused by a liberal agenda that Biden represents.
That African Americans are more likely to be Christians and that Hispanics are more likely to be anti-communist are theories I could get behind.
But.
Biden is no more radical or left wing than Hillary was, so why would Trump's vote share be up with them this time around (unless the culture wars have had a strongly polarising effect).
I think there are plenty of theories that partially fit but no one obvious answer.
For me it remains the surprise of the night. If a bookie was offering odds on Trump's vote being down from 2016 with white men but up from all other ethnic groups, how many of us would have taken it? It sounds so bizarre and counterintuitive to the narrative of the last four years, I wouldn't have taken that bet at 200/1.
The problem is that people always confuse the marginal voter with the median voter. Remember that we're talking about demographics that still voted for Biden in large numbers.
I/m on Trump in NV, the networks can witter on about MI and WI but I have a feeling NV is flipping now, if Jon Ralston is worried so am I. lets hope those here and Nate Cohn are right about PA
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
Trump 2024. Only question is which Trump.
An all female Trump v Harris contest?
Biden won't last the full term IMO.
He'll either die in office or his senility will become so obvious he'll have to be replaced in the first year. Harris is likely to be POTUS for at least two or three years before 2024 so she'll be the incumbent POTUS with quite a long record to defend.
Donald Trump's ridiculous speech in the early hours was the most disgraceful made by an English-speaking politician since Enoch Powell's rivers of blood. And whatever else you think of Powell at least he was cogent.
I suspect, without proof, that Trump will have seriously pissed off a lot of middle America. Officials have done a phenomenal job with this record-breaking turnout and have worked with commendable diligence and integrity under trying conditions.
Contrary to a lot of people's opinions, I think this has been a triumph of democracy.
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 can buy the theory that Trump is down among white men because some white men only voted Trump because they couldn't vote for a woman in 2016. Although I also wonder if it's because more young + college educated white men turned out this time than in 2016 (e.g. Bernie bros staying at home in 2016 but not now)?
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
I had this very conversation with a black person who said he would have voted for Trump a few days ago.
His answer was simple.
‘Because I like him. I like how he says outrageous things and annoys people. I like how he isn’t afraid of anything. I like his views on many things as well.’
Now, I may think that person wasmaking a strange choice. Indeed, I did, although I didn’t show it (after all, he’s entitled to his views). But a lot of African Americans are of course Christians, and perhaps not wholly enthused by a liberal agenda that Biden represents.
What about argument Biden is a Catholic so as Christian as them, whilst pussysnatching and porn star shagging whilst wife is pregnant isn’t the sort of behaviour to endear to Christians? 😗
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
Trump 2024. Only question is which Trump.
An all female Trump v Harris contest?
Biden won't last the full term IMO.
He'll either die in office or his senility will become so obvious he'll have to be replaced in the first year. Harris is likely to be POTUS for at least two or three years before 2024 so she'll be the incumbent POTUS with quite a long record to defend.
I've backed Trump in Nevada, @Pulpstar please don't hate me.
To me its a good odds bet, its very close 8000 only and as most of the votes left are on the day votes being dropped in boxes thats been shown to favour Rs in this state, So its certainly possible even if less than 50/50
Donald Trump's ridiculous speech in the early hours was the most disgraceful made by an English-speaking politician since Enoch Powell's rivers of blood. And whatever else you think of Powell at least he was cogent.
I suspect, without proof, that Trump will have seriously pissed off a lot of middle America. Officials have done a phenomenal job with this record-breaking turnout and have worked with commendable diligence and integrity under trying conditions.
Contrary to a lot of people's opinions, I think this has been a triumph of democracy.
I would like to say Rose I found your posts through all this perceptive, calm and firm where necessary. You have had a fine election night,day and evening.
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
Trump 2024. Only question is which Trump.
An all female Trump v Harris contest?
Biden won't last the full term IMO.
He'll either die in office or his senility will become so obvious he'll have to be replaced in the first year. Harris is likely to be POTUS for at least two or three years before 2024 so she'll be the incumbent POTUS with quite a long record to defend.
Will be interesting.
Ghoulish.
By the same token have always said Trump wouldn't last the full term either... Either he'd die in office too or more likely the Dems would finally get him out through an impeachment lol!
I've never been able to see either Trump or Biden doing four more years...
Donald Trump's ridiculous speech in the early hours was the most disgraceful made by an English-speaking politician since Enoch Powell's rivers of blood. And whatever else you think of Powell at least he was cogent.
I suspect, without proof, that Trump will have seriously pissed off a lot of middle America. Officials have done a phenomenal job with this record-breaking turnout and have worked with commendable diligence and integrity under trying conditions.
Contrary to a lot of people's opinions, I think this has been a triumph of democracy.
Yep - i doubt a lot of Americans like their President suggesting that they don't live in a free and fair democracy.
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."
It's extremely patronising and explains why the Democrats will never convincingly win for as long as they head down that path.
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
The NYT is currently showing Trump with a 6.5% lead, with 82% reported. So to draw level, Biden would need a 29.6% lead in the remaining votes. That's a lot less than the 41.9% lead for mail ballots based on party registration.
Donald Trump's ridiculous speech in the early hours was the most disgraceful made by an English-speaking politician since Enoch Powell's rivers of blood. And whatever else you think of Powell at least he was cogent.
I suspect, without proof, that Trump will have seriously pissed off a lot of middle America. Officials have done a phenomenal job with this record-breaking turnout and have worked with commendable diligence and integrity under trying conditions.
Contrary to a lot of people's opinions, I think this has been a triumph of democracy.
I would like to say Rose I found your posts through all this perceptive, calm and firm where necessary. You have had a fine election night,day and evening.
That's very sweet of you.
I made some mistakes prior to last night and hope I didn't lead people too astray.
Trump can't win without Nevada, so unclear why you can better odds on him there than for the Presidency,
I guess he could get PA + AZ.
I think AZs gone for Trump , though not called by most, AP and Fox called it early and it seems that way , but in this election,,,,,who knows
From my understanding after having read a bit more of this, I think Biden is in the clear in AZ. The party identification of the votes remaining to be counted skews republican, but there have been a lot of such voters who have actually voted Democrat in AZ (McCain effect?). So in all likelihood the gap will tighten but it won’t be enough.
Comments
You can see exactly how many mail ballots are outstanding.
Hope I am wrong
Biden really needs AZ/NV and PA to put a stop to Trump shenanigans
He has already got WI & MI IMO
A Chinese precedent?
Most Republican politicians don't share that, and are distancing themselves from it either directly, by silence, or by recasting in the more traditional "all votes must count equally" way. They don't believe there's widespread fraud, still have the Senate, know Biden is a moderate, and are content to wait four years and go again (and indeed only two years for the House). They'll wait and see if a route remains through counting the votes, and if it all turns on razor-fine recounts in Nevada or whatever they'll see if it might be saved, but have absolutely no intention of joining that madman in the Fuhrerbunker, ranting and raving about fraud and betrayal while it all slips inevitably away.
I guess for me the curious thing is that, increased ethnic minority support or not, media bias or not, Trump has made some decisions and statements over his presidency that make it more likely than not he sympathises with white supremacists. Very fine people on both sides, stand backand stand by, etc.
But it doesn't seem to have hurt him with these groups. That's just baffling.
So one of the following is true, either
a) the ethnic minorities who voted for Trump don't interpret his statements as racist as I (and the media) have, or
b) they think he's a racist but still voted for him anyway.
In both circumstances, I ask the question - why?
https://twitter.com/Goodish_Will/status/1323938729342439424
UPDATE. Ahh. HY beat me to it. Of course. Well done HY
Better Liquidity
Biden 1.25
Trump 5
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1324064647230627840
What he is saying is important,, Biden is only 8000 or so votes up
If Trump did flip NV, and holds GA and NC it means PA decides the election
Only in America.
His answer was simple.
‘Because I like him. I like how he says outrageous things and annoys people. I like how he isn’t afraid of anything. I like his views on many things as well.’
Now, I may think that person wasmaking a strange choice. Indeed, I did, although I didn’t show it (after all, he’s entitled to his views). But a lot of African Americans are of course Christians, and perhaps not wholly enthused by a liberal agenda that Biden represents.
Or both.
Would equate to a further 318k reduction if straight line ie Trump wins by 87k
Of course the postman could deliver further postmarked votes as well as military ones
Its going to be on a knife edge methinks
If Biden gets PA there is literally no way back for Trump unless he pulls off a miracle in MI (which has pretty much certainly gone for Biden) NV and AZ would not save him.
This is generally ascribed to social conservatism.
I'm worried Manchester United are gonna sack Solskjær and hire a competent manager.
We know about the staggering levels of gun crime and violence among the young African-American communities across the States and whether it's gang-related or drug-related the instance of violent death among young black males is heart-breaking.
Do Democrat administrations cause this? Not entirely - it's a much complex set of issues around culture, economic opportunity as well as role models, self-esteem and similar. I don't see how a Republican administration in Baltimore would change much of that but the notion a sense of frustration and anger couldn't manifest itself in a change of politics is realistic.
Trump appears to have a strong motive for questioning the numbers of votes cast by Democrats, as does Biden with votes cast for Republicans. Am sure that this year's result is as clean as Kennedy's narrow victory in 1960.
Did you see my post about Dimbleby saying exactly that on election night years ago?
Told by Bob Worcester (IIRC) that Obama had won, Dimbleby refused to call the election for Obama because the polls were still open in CA and he was "assuming" that Cali would vote Democrat.
As with our own PM, Trump is a master of appearing all things to anyone willing to listen him. There are plenty of parts of his character that will have broad appeal, anti-establishment, successful business, f***-em attitude, misogynist, racist to other groups (there will be hispanics who dislike blacks and vice versa remember, race isnt solely white vs the rest), and most importantly a track record on the economy and stock market.
Wisconsin Biden 1.03
Plenty of people aren't sufficiently politically engaged for either of those quotes to have made a huge impact on them. Plus you need to know the context, and reject the spin offered by his supporters, to get why they are so vile.
In 2016, on the other hand, there was no missing or misunderstanding "Build the Wall", which was the biggest theme of his campaign. Well he didn't build it, and it hasn't been a campaign issue this time around.
Not hard to imagine a Hispanic Republican voting blue, or not voting, in 2016 but red this year.
It does need his phone call to Joe and support to transitioning?
'Merica, man.
So I hope those PBers on here confident about Biden overturning that big defecit in PA are right. As if not NV could give Trump the WH keys again
Nevada on the other hand probably slightly favours Mr Trump right now...
But.
Biden is no more radical or left wing than Hillary was, so why would Trump's vote share be up with them this time around (unless the culture wars have had a strongly polarising effect).
I think there are plenty of theories that partially fit but no one obvious answer.
For me it remains the surprise of the night. If a bookie was offering odds on Trump's vote being down from 2016 with white men but up from all other ethnic groups, how many of us would have taken it? It sounds so bizarre and counterintuitive to the narrative of the last four years, I wouldn't have taken that bet at 200/1.
I'm tempted by Trump.
It will be time for the next election season by the time they finish counting these ballots!
Ballot counters in Michigan carry on counting "Not those ballots !"
PA is the interesting one.
He'll either die in office or his senility will become so obvious he'll have to be replaced in the first year. Harris is likely to be POTUS for at least two or three years before 2024 so she'll be the incumbent POTUS with quite a long record to defend.
Will be interesting.
I suspect, without proof, that Trump will have seriously pissed off a lot of middle America. Officials have done a phenomenal job with this record-breaking turnout and have worked with commendable diligence and integrity under trying conditions.
Contrary to a lot of people's opinions, I think this has been a triumph of democracy.
I’m going to invest some more I think. Insurance bet.
2000 - 67.01%
2004 - 73.24%
2008 - 69.20%
2012 - 70.14%
2016 - 67.34%
2020 - 89.25%
I've never been able to see either Trump or Biden doing four more years...
I made some mistakes prior to last night and hope I didn't lead people too astray.
Snr
But notably shorter in NV.
I wonder why they did that?
https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1324086430910582784
Oh...
Nevada though, I am really unsure about.