I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
There'll be a combo of factors in the GA runoff(s ?)
i) Motivated Dem base that want to get control of the senate ii) Middle ground voters that want split Gov't. iii) Demotivated MAGA that won't come out.
I don't think group (ii) is actually that big. So the Dems could win it.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
I have to say Trump's idiotic postal voting crusade looks even more stupid now. How many voters has he lost in swing states because they stayed home on election day or were unable to vote in person but they didn't trust the postal vote system enough to vote? Could have cost him PA, WI and NV.
There were quite a few people who said this in advance.
The key to winning elections is to Get Out The Vote, not to try and stop people from voting.
It is good that a President that put more effort into suppressing and discrediting votes has lost an election with the highest ever turnout.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
I have to say Trump's idiotic postal voting crusade looks even more stupid now. How many voters has he lost in swing states because they stayed home on election day or were unable to vote in person but they didn't trust the postal vote system enough to vote? Could have cost him PA, WI and NV.
Presumably he did so because he thinks it could help him win it in the courts post election. It still might.
Can anyone tell me which of the remaining uncalled states states are currently actually counting and which have/are shut down for the night?
Shut down implies some of them started. I am not sure that Nevada did. Pennsylvania seem to have done a few hundred. I honestly think that the local council elections are better organised and run. It's embarrassing.
Rather unfair David. Nevada showing as 86% counted per NYT. I agree they could do much better though.
Yes but they have been at that with an 8K gap for more than 24 hours. What on earth have they been doing? Its not a particularly populous state.
They have done the counting apparently but won't declare until the secretary of state gets in in the morning. It's 0350hrs there at the moment.
Imagine if Trump won the 2024 nomination from prison.
He’s registered in Florida, to run i outreach guess you have to be able to vote, I would guess, Florida does lot let felons vote until they discharge obligations therefore I doubt if he could forum.
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
‘The only pollster who comes out of this with any credit is that lady in Iowa who got the state result very close IMHO. The other polls were both fairly off, one way or the other. They got some contests a bit closer than others but none can claim any credit for being close everywhere.’
As I understand it, and correct me where I’m wrong, Ann Selzer the Queen of Polling.
Her November poll, very much for Trump, was out of step with the pro Biden polling, but proved more accurate.
However it was very different than her more favourable Biden poll the month before.
So was the October poll wildly wrong, or did something actually change during the two polls, she picked up other pollsters didn’t?
Would we have greater trust in polling if it moves a lot month to month? Which it doesn’t tend to do? But polls aren’t simply measuring switching, at certain times people may be more likely to come off a fence with an opinion?
I think another factor that might explain her superior performance is that, when there are large changes in the electorate, as there was this time with the increase in the number of first time voters, it is easier for a local pollster focusing on one market to pick this up, particularly if that phenomenon only solidifies in the last month of a campaign.
So National/international pollsters can improve by tapping into local knowledge much better?
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
If vaccinations have started by then you could imagine sectors of the economy being restarted one by one. Furlough might be needed for some sectors, but a smaller number as the campaign continues.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
A critical factor is where those 78% were coming from - if it was most Philly, less optimism; if it is equally across the state including Republican strongholds, more so
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
There'll be a combo of factors in the GA runoff(s ?)
i) Motivated Dem base that want to get control of the senate ii) Middle ground voters that want split Gov't. iii) Demotivated MAGA that won't come out.
I don't think group (ii) is actually that big. So the Dems could win it.
(iv) massive outside money (although that does not seem to have helped the Dems this time around in other states, like NC ,SC, KY, ME)
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Both views are correct.
If we want to comply with WTO we cant waive customs checks. If we decide waiving custom checks for a short period is more important than following WTO rules, we will do so and there wont be significant consequences from it.
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Of course that is right. And the lorry parks are being built.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
Won't they both become highly competitive runoffs though? Given the Presidential vote. And that they will be, in effect, by-elections for control of the Senate? I can foresee plenty of money and a big GOTV from both sides. Edit: I see @TimT Has made a similar observation. Although I don't buy the de-motivated MAGA argument. Unless Trump somehow clings on.
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
It's a good call.
Yes from 2 Dec (4 weeks today ) Boris will return England to Tiers, case numbers will be a bit lower than now so maybe some Tier 3 areas reduced to Tier 2, maybe not.
A 'nationally agreed' solution for 24 Dec to 3 Jan Christmas/New Year for socialising.
Then back on the lockdown - similar to what we have now - mid Jan to end Feb, say 6 weeks.
Yes Furlough will be extended to 31 March 2021 at 80%. (Just in case we need a lockdown extended to March, quite possible)
A run off senate election because one candidate got 49.99% of the vote is another ridiculous feature of the US election process. A minimum threshold isnt a bad idea to ensure its not someone winning with 20% in a very split field, but make it 40 or 45%.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
12 years is a generation now? I thought teen pregnancies were on the down now ...
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
It's a good call.
Yes from 2 Dec (4 weeks today ) Boris will return England to Tiers, case numbers will be a bit lower than now so maybe some Tier 3 areas reduced to Tier 2, maybe not.
A 'nationally agreed' solution for 24 Dec to 3 Jan Christmas/New Year for socialising.
Then back on the lockdown - similar to what we have now - mid Jan to end Feb, say 6 weeks.
Yes Furlough will be extended to 31 March 2021 at 80%. (Just in case we need a lockdown extended to March, quite possible)
With the Xmas relaxation filling the hospitals and icu beds and lots of grannies dying, great idea.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
12 years is a generation now? I thought teen pregnancies were on the down now ...
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
A better car analogy: We're about to unveil the Vauxhall Vectra as a British car. Designed in Germany. Built in Germany. Badged everywhere else as an Opel. But we're going to rip that Opel badge off and stick a Vauxhall badge on it and claim its Completely Different. That its British. Just don't pull the VX badge off the grill and see the Opel badge-shaped panel...
Exactly the same? No differences whatsoever?
So left hand drive?
They drive on the left in Ireland?
Seriously, look at a last gen Vectra. Plenty of them about. The Vauxhall badge falls off cos crap glue and underneath is a panel shaped for the Opel badge.
If Biden does win its going to be feel very odd having a President waiting for data before saying anything isn't it?
Do we think Trump will set him up as the real President in exile in another country like an Avignon Pope/Antipope?
If they do manage to get him out of the WH he will start campaigning for 2024 the next day. He isn't going anywhere.
Running and winning again would be the only salve for his huge, loser butt-hurtiness. Besides from all appearances Trump actually appears to enjoy campaigning, probably something to do with the uncritical adulation.
He enjoys having his name written on tall buildings too, owning stuff, playing Mr "likes sacking people" Tycoon for the ratings, and "winning" in the TV wrestling world. He's all me me me, but within that he has ranged in his life between fields of application. He's much more likely to return to TV than start a 2024 campaign this winter. I wonder whether people are joking when they say he'll run to Moscow. Perhaps he'll visit, rather like ex-king Edward visited Hitler, but he won't go and hole up there. Jail is unlikely too, as it was for Andreotti and Berlusconi. Admittedly A was sharp and B can turn on the charm whereas Trump is neither sharp nor capable of persuading the middle ground, but jailing him isn't worth anyone's time. He'll be sued into the ground or heavily fined maybe. He is emotionally weak and he will rant for a bit, or maybe even for a long time if anyone ever wants to hear his thoughts, but there won't be many takers. Stay around in politics? Nah. Meanwhile QAnon will wither, as did its previous incarnation the Tea Party movement, and as did Pepe. The NRA, though, will continue, as will anti-Roe Wade.
I have to say Trump's idiotic postal voting crusade looks even more stupid now. How many voters has he lost in swing states because they stayed home on election day or were unable to vote in person but they didn't trust the postal vote system enough to vote? Could have cost him PA, WI and NV.
Turnout has been unusually high though, and in my opinion that is the source of the polling errors.
Polls simply don't do well when turnout is significantly different to usual. They are very poor at predicting who the extra voters are, and what their motivation is.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
There'll be a combo of factors in the GA runoff(s ?)
i) Motivated Dem base that want to get control of the senate ii) Middle ground voters that want split Gov't. iii) Demotivated MAGA that won't come out.
I don't think group (ii) is actually that big. So the Dems could win it.
(iv) massive outside money (although that does not seem to have helped the Dems this time around in other states, like NC ,SC, KY, ME)
Bloomberg's spending seems to have anti-correlated with Biden's performance.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
There'll be a combo of factors in the GA runoff(s ?)
i) Motivated Dem base that want to get control of the senate ii) Middle ground voters that want split Gov't. iii) Demotivated MAGA that won't come out.
I don't think group (ii) is actually that big. So the Dems could win it.
(iv) massive outside money (although that does not seem to have helped the Dems this time around in other states, like NC ,SC, KY, ME)
Yes - one of the stories of this election is that there does seem to be significant diminishing returns to campaign expenditure. Witness Bloomberg's wasted millions in FL.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened in 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House
A generation?
But America doesn't vote for the Presidency after six years.
I think HY is right, 68 to 92 punctuated by just 4 Carter years is a long time.
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Of course that is right. And the lorry parks are being built.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
Odd to see American-style dates from someone I presumed to be a British poster.
Can anyone tell me which of the remaining uncalled states states are currently actually counting and which have/are shut down for the night?
Shut down implies some of them started. I am not sure that Nevada did. Pennsylvania seem to have done a few hundred. I honestly think that the local council elections are better organised and run. It's embarrassing.
Rather unfair David. Nevada showing as 86% counted per NYT. I agree they could do much better though.
Definitely. Scotland and Nevada have a similar GDP, but Scotland counts their votes in several hours despite having almost twice the population, not several days.
Fiddling around checking signatures on postal votes and the like takes the time, and our system allows this mostly to be done in advance of the count
That their system is crap is kinda the point
But then you are back to the point I made earlier about partisan versus neutral officials. If you tried our system in the US with widespread opening of postal ballots days in advance, do we think that data could be kept from the parties? Or public
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
IT IS NOT 50/50 IN R COUNTIES!!!!
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
A better car analogy: We're about to unveil the Vauxhall Vectra as a British car. Designed in Germany. Built in Germany. Badged everywhere else as an Opel. But we're going to rip that Opel badge off and stick a Vauxhall badge on it and claim its Completely Different. That its British. Just don't pull the VX badge off the grill and see the Opel badge-shaped panel...
Exactly the same? No differences whatsoever?
So left hand drive?
They drive on the left in Ireland?
Seriously, look at a last gen Vectra. Plenty of them about. The Vauxhall badge falls off cos crap glue and underneath is a panel shaped for the Opel badge.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened in 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House
A generation?
But America doesn't vote for the Presidency after six years.
I think HY is right, 68 to 92 punctuated by just 4 Carter years is a long time.
We'd be on 92 to 24 now with just 4 Bush years in between if it were on popular vote...
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Of course that is right. And the lorry parks are being built.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
Sure. We could extend the transition beyond year end. But we've legislated not to. And on 1/1/21 importers will have to submit customs forms through an imaginary customs computer to be inspected by an imaginary customs official.
If we waive our right to do checks and let all traffic pass through as now on EU terms and tariffs then what has changed? The government keep telling industry that time is running out to make changes for the new order. But won't say what the new order is or what has to be changed. So almost nothing is being done. So we will absolutely leave the border open because we can't physically close it.
That is the deal we will have. The right to go our own way. At some unspecified point in the future. Whilst staying exactly where we are for an indefinite time. Which is why industry is doing three parts of nothing to prepare for changes because the industry has concluded that there won't be any.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
12 years is a generation now? I thought teen pregnancies were on the down now ...
We have been under COVID restrictions for, what, 8 months now. You will see articles in the media about "a generation of footballers being lost", "a generation of artists being lost", etc.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened in 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House
A generation?
But America doesn't vote for the Presidency after six years.
I think HY is right, 68 to 92 punctuated by just 4 Carter years is a long time.
Really just 2 candidates, Nixon and Reagan. Bush 1 enjoyed a huge uplift from the deficit funded boom. Then he had to raise taxes to pay for it, and that was the end of that.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
12 years is a generation now? I thought teen pregnancies were on the down now ...
We have been under COVID restrictions for, what, 8 months now. You will see articles in the media about "a generation of footballers being lost", "a generation of artists being lost", etc.
Still, gives some force to Sturgeon's argument for another referendum...
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
The Republicans have held 49 Senate seats for certain.
North Carolina remains to be declared, but is thought a probable Republican hold. Both Georgia Senate seats will go to a run off, but the Republicans will be favourites, given that their overall vote share in Senate contests exceeds that of the Democrats.
Won't they both become highly competitive runoffs though? Given the Presidential vote. And that they will be, in effect, by-elections for control of the Senate? I can foresee plenty of money and a big GOTV from both sides. Edit: I see @TimT Has made a similar observation. Although I don't buy the de-motivated MAGA argument. Unless Trump somehow clings on.
I think they will be highly competitive, but I don't think Republican voters will be demotivated - very much the reverse, I should think.
FPT: "There was one poster - sorry I forget the name - who predicted a 269-269 tie that not so long ago looked like being spot on (not just the final number, but every individual state race) except for NE2. Now Biden looks like getting PA and possibly GA, it doesn't look quite as good, but I'd say whoever it was emerges with credit."
It was Drutt.
Logging back in. Can confirm numbers, though I think I got more states wrong than that.
Good news. Paying people not to work because you've shut them down is cheaper than paying for the consequences of putting them all out of work. Does someone want to have a word with Sainsbury's John Lewis etc and tell them they don't need to sack all their workers?
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
IT IS NOT 50/50 IN R COUNTIES!!!!
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
Can anyone tell me which of the remaining uncalled states states are currently actually counting and which have/are shut down for the night?
Shut down implies some of them started. I am not sure that Nevada did. Pennsylvania seem to have done a few hundred. I honestly think that the local council elections are better organised and run. It's embarrassing.
Rather unfair David. Nevada showing as 86% counted per NYT. I agree they could do much better though.
Definitely. Scotland and Nevada have a similar GDP, but Scotland counts their votes in several hours despite having almost twice the population, not several days.
Fiddling around checking signatures on postal votes and the like takes the time, and our system allows this mostly to be done in advance of the count
That their system is crap is kinda the point
But then you are back to the point I made earlier about partisan versus neutral officials. If you tried our system in the US with widespread opening of postal ballots days in advance, do we think that data could be kept from the parties? Or public
I don't disagree with that. The entire process there is a joke quite frankly.
January sucks as a month and everyone's broke and miserable in January.
If you're going to have lockdown for a month then I would vote for that to be January.
My birthday is in January and pre-children we always had a long weekend away, somewhere cosy in the middle of nowhere with a fire, a good single malt, walking in all weathers, more than once finding our way back by torch-light/map/compass, with the help of a hip-flask, having underestimated how long a walk would take, including one blizzard which completely obliterated the path in the Yorkshire Moors.
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Of course that is right. And the lorry parks are being built.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
Odd to see American-style dates from someone I presumed to be a British poster.
What?
1/1/21 = 1 January 2021 1/7/21 or as I wrote in text "six months" later = 1 July 2021 1/9/21 or as I wrote in text "three months" later = 1 September 2021 [this was a brainfart, of course three months later is 1/10/21]
How is that American? American style would have been 1/1/21, 7/1/21 and 9/1/21 respectively.
Unless you thought I was suggesting we disapply the checks for a grand total of 9 days and not 9 months.
If Biden does win its going to be feel very odd having a President waiting for data before saying anything isn't it?
Do we think Trump will set him up as the real President in exile in another country like an Avignon Pope/Antipope?
If they do manage to get him out of the WH he will start campaigning for 2024 the next day. He isn't going anywhere.
Oh that`s grimly interesting. I never thought of that. Surely GOP won`t allow Trump to run again??
He will be allowed to but he'll be a loser. Americans don't like losers or retreads.
The moment the counting stops the GOP starts looking forwards not backwards.
Maybe, but then I remember the persistent residual level of support for Gore and H. Clinton among Democrats.
If Trump's supporters believe he was cheated out of an election win, they won't see him as a loser. And he is, after all, currently more than 5.6 million votes up on his 2016 total.
Normally when an incumbent loses it's because there's a decisive shift against them. This time it's like we had two waves, one for and one against, and if Trump loses it will be because the wave against was somewhat larger. But Trump still had a wave of support. That will have consequences.
It's one reason the election reminds me of UKGE2017.
Maybe. And I think the fact he is likely to go down claiming, and with many believing, that he is the rightful President puts him in a very different position to previous losers. There are Democrats who believe Gore had it stolen in Florida and that Clinton won the popular vote handsomely so "ought" to be President but, to their credit, neither Gore nor Clinton made it their mission to fuel it - at some point they said through gritted teeth "game over and best of luck to the President". So he is the king across the water for many.
Several reasons, though, to think the 2024 scenario won't happen:
1. I'm not sure we're in the realm of protecting the Trump Presidency any more, and we're into protecting the Trump Ego. It's very important to his fragile psyche that he is not a "Loser" (mainly due to deep-seated daddy issues). So what he wants to achieve now is a self image of someone who didn't lose. Once he's done that, I am not sure he wants to go again in 2024. As far as he is concerned, he ran twice and won twice.
2. Trump has major and energy-sapping legal and financial problems to worry about over the next four years. It's not a question of heading back to Mar-a-Largo and plotting sweet revenge - he's got big personal issues to deal with.
3. He will be 78 (same age as Biden in a fortnight). I have to admire his energy at 74, but the difference between 74 and 78 isn't the same as the difference between 34 and 38. Typically, age really starts taking its toll at that stage - he viciously made that point about Biden, and wasn't totally wrong.
4. Memories do fade, and relevance does diminish. He's a newsworthy guy, and has a loyal following. But it all just matters less when he isn't making presidential proclamations, introducing legislation, hiring and firing powerful people, meeting the great dictators and so on. He becomes a prolific tweeter and social influencer - which is fine and not by any means irrelevant - but just isn't the same.
5. The leadership of the GOP will be keen to move on. They might struggle with that with a lot of their supporters, and it didn't ultimately stop Trump in 2016, but they do want to move on. The McConnells of this world know incumbent Presidents shouldn't really lose, that he was a nightmare to work with, and that he lost the popular vote twice. So they might not succeed in stopping the Second Coming, but won't be working to facilitate it.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
@theenglishborn Do you have a link to the Pennsylvania offical site.? Every time I try to go to what I assume the offical site is I get redirected away.
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
I see it differently. I think it is politically impossible to come out of lockdown back to tiers in December.
Can Boris announce my good people of Suffolk, cotswolds, London, my government grants you Christmas, but for those of you in Redcar, Darlington, Stockton, Christmas is cancelled?
Politically he can’t can he. Whatever Christmas and New Year restrictions are, we all have to be in it together?
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
It's a good call.
Yes from 2 Dec (4 weeks today ) Boris will return England to Tiers, case numbers will be a bit lower than now so maybe some Tier 3 areas reduced to Tier 2, maybe not.
A 'nationally agreed' solution for 24 Dec to 3 Jan Christmas/New Year for socialising.
Then back on the lockdown - similar to what we have now - mid Jan to end Feb, say 6 weeks.
Yes Furlough will be extended to 31 March 2021 at 80%. (Just in case we need a lockdown extended to March, quite possible)
With the Xmas relaxation filling the hospitals and icu beds and lots of grannies dying, great idea.
I get the desire for it but both here and in Spain an awfl lot of people will opt for prudence until a vaccine is in place. My partner and I here will have Xmas 'por dos' and al my UK relatives will be much the same.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
IT IS NOT 50/50 IN R COUNTIES!!!!
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
@theenglishborn Do you have a link to the Pennsylvania offical site.? Every time I try to go to what I assume the offical site is I get redirected away.
I am afraid not, if it notices you from outside the US it redirects. Maybe try a VPN? I have been going off twitter and reddit screenshots
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
I see it differently. I think it is politically impossible to come out of lockdown back to tiers in December.
Can Boris announce my good people of Suffolk, cotswolds, London, my government grants you Christmas, but for those of you in Redcar, Darlington, Stockton, Christmas is cancelled?
Politically he can’t can he. Whatever Christmas and New Year restrictions are, we all have to be in it together?
Agreed. Probably nationwide Tier 3, maybe Tier 2 if we are lucky.
Have just put CNN on. They've basically been doing the same programme for 48 hours now. Amazing stuff, but it does baffle me how the American electoral system is so slow
No deal doesn't mean we have to do checks. You are categorically wrong on this point.
We can agree a deal to avoid checks (though actually most of the checks discussed aren't affected by whether is a deal or not actually). Or we could choose to unilaterally delay or not do checks.
If we choose to unilaterally not do them then that is our choice. That's not a deal. It also means we can change that unilaterally if of when we choose to do so.
That's not saying we can't have babies. It's saying we may choose to have babies in the future but for now we are choosing to use a condom because it suits us to do so for now.
Doing customs checks is a requirement of WTO Rules - which is what "No Deal" means in the context of Brexit. So unless we are not going WTO then we will have to do checks which we cannot do.
What you think is frankly not relevant to reality. Both the UK and EU negotiators know reality which is why the UK is rapidly heading towards a deal. Back in the day you could buy a Toyota Aygo or a Citroen C1 or a Peugeot 107 built on the same line in the same factory. All three were the literal same car - same panels, same chassis, same engine, different badge. We are about to trade in our 2006 C1 and get a 2006 Aygo and claim its a completely different car.
You're wrong again.
Doing customs checks is not a part of WTO Rules.
Not abusing those checks is. But waiving those checks, if that is what we as a sovereign nation choose to do is entirely within the rules.
The WTO is barely different to international law in that it is, as my avatar says, more like guidelines. The WTO sets guidelines in its rules but how countries operate within them is up to them. As a sovereign country how we operate will be up to us not the WTO.
Yes there's the possibility of disputes but they take years or decades to resolve.
We can't selectively waive customs checks, that is against WTO rules. If in our trade deal with the EU it says both sides have agreed to waive customs checks for certain classes of goods then that's fine. In a no deal we either have customs checks for everyone or no one, that means we will have customs checks for EU goods, hence the lorry parks in Kent.
Of course that is right. And the lorry parks are being built.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
Sure. We could extend the transition beyond year end. But we've legislated not to. And on 1/1/21 importers will have to submit customs forms through an imaginary customs computer to be inspected by an imaginary customs official.
If we waive our right to do checks and let all traffic pass through as now on EU terms and tariffs then what has changed? The government keep telling industry that time is running out to make changes for the new order. But won't say what the new order is or what has to be changed. So almost nothing is being done. So we will absolutely leave the border open because we can't physically close it.
That is the deal we will have. The right to go our own way. At some unspecified point in the future. Whilst staying exactly where we are for an indefinite time. Which is why industry is doing three parts of nothing to prepare for changes because the industry has concluded that there won't be any.
If we waive our right to do checks and let all traffic pass then what has changed is that we will no longer be paying the EU to be in their market nor will we be obliged to follow their rules.
Just because we can do checks doesn't mean we have to do them.
We don't want a closed border, nobody is saying deal or no deal that we will have a closed border.
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
IT IS NOT 50/50 IN R COUNTIES!!!!
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
@theenglishborn Do you have a link to the Pennsylvania offical site.? Every time I try to go to what I assume the offical site is I get redirected away.
I am afraid not, if it notices you from outside the US it redirects. Maybe try a VPN? I have been going off twitter and reddit screenshots
So, just to be clear - how many votes do we think are left to count in PA?
I`ve not been following the Senate race at all. Can someone please summarise where we are? GOP still hold the Senate yes?
Yes and the Dems also lost some house seats, though still hold it ofc. So in some ways not a bad night for Rs after all and much to look forward to I think
If the GOP holds the Senate, gets close in the House, and loses Donald Trump, that would indeed be an excellent night for the party ...
Or it could foretell they will be out of the White House for a generation, as happened after 1980 when Carter was the last President to lose office after only 1 term of his party in the White House.
It was not until Bill Clinton in 1992 that the Democrats won a presidential election again
12 years is a generation now? I thought teen pregnancies were on the down now ...
We have been under COVID restrictions for, what, 8 months now. You will see articles in the media about "a generation of footballers being lost", "a generation of artists being lost", etc.
That makes more sense to me, frankly, as the 8 months is lost to everyone of every age group at the same time. Lost is still an exaggeration - disrupted or interrupted would more accurate.
I'm calling it - lockdown partially eased in Dec, then reimposed in Jan and running till March.
I see it differently. I think it is politically impossible to come out of lockdown back to tiers in December.
Can Boris announce my good people of Suffolk, cotswolds, London, my government grants you Christmas, but for those of you in Redcar, Darlington, Stockton, Christmas is cancelled?
Politically he can’t can he. Whatever Christmas and New Year restrictions are, we all have to be in it together?
Agreed. Probably nationwide Tier 3, maybe Tier 2 if we are lucky.
They can say whatever they like, people will ignore the rules and do Christmas because they are human beings and they are increasingly sick of it.
I keep coming back to the elephant in the room. All these students who have been kettled in their pox factories all term. Off they go back home for Christmas. See their parents and siblings and grandparents and relatives. We're going to need furlough in the new year because the spike in January is going to be brutal.
So those show 700k votes left but as mentioned earlier seems like the official site is claiming 488k to go. If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60% If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win. As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
@theenglishborn Do you have a link to the Pennsylvania offical site.? Every time I try to go to what I assume the offical site is I get redirected away.
I am afraid not, if it notices you from outside the US it redirects. Maybe try a VPN? I have been going off twitter and reddit screenshots
Damn it, our company closed down its American office so no VPN endpoint in America!
Have just put CNN on. They've basically been doing the same programme for 48 hours now. Amazing stuff, but it does baffle me how the American electoral system is so slow
My favourite is they are still running the programme with the slogan “Election Night in America” umm guys election night was over 24 hours ago.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
Philly has 70% in but all the other counties with 70-80% counted are all Republican and all bar one strongholds. They total 357K votes so far vs Philly's 576K. Taking a 77% average, that means there are over 100K votes left here in mainly Republican strongholds
Then go down to the 80-90% block in. Republican counties at 651K vs Democrat counties at 1.03m. Caveats on both sides - there are more counties with lower R leads but also the three big D counties have much lower leads than Philly.
Then let's do the 90-95% block. All are Republican and total 735K votes. All sit within the 93-95% count range and some are not strongholds but a few are. If you take an average of 94%, that means there are 47K votes out there, which potentially could be critical.
If you then look at all the other counties that are below the "greater than 98%", all bar one are Republican and they are all strongly Republican. Roughly they have 910K votes counted so far for the R counties vs 492K for the D (Montgomery). Trump might be able to eek out another 15-20K votes advantage from there.
One critical point - some of these counties (and they were Republican) started ALL counting late, not just postal ballots so it is likely their splits to come are not as D-friendly as you would think.
DYOR
Just one extra bit to add: in the 80-90% range, Allegheny is 89% in so I reckon in that band, the Democrat counties have c. 155K votes to come and the Rs 125K
You are misreading what is happening. Almost all on the day vote has been counted (Clarion still has a lot to count). The remaining percentage figures the NY Times is reporting is all mail ballot. Mail ballots split Trump no matter how red the county.
There is no Trump advantage to any county still to count mail ballots, the only question is how big Biden's lead is in each counties VBM figure.
Ok, let's do the Maths. I have taken all areas that have reported 95% or less. That gets me to 677K votes so i'm not sure what number is being assumed but there will be other counties obviously out there with 95%+ votes that accumulate.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
IT IS NOT 50/50 IN R COUNTIES!!!!
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
What? No booing from the highly partisan crowd? C'mon, what kind of patriots did these people think they were?
I recall in 2008 that there were boos at the McCain concession speech when he moved on to congratulating Obama, which caused the man visible embarrassment as he calmed the hotheads down.
With hindsight it shows the trajectory we were on in partisan terms. Bush Snr was able to offer his concession and his supporters accepted and admired the magnanimous words. By McCain's time, a fair number of supporters didn't want any positive words said about their opponent. Now, the defeated candidate actively orchestrates the hate.
Comments
i) Motivated Dem base that want to get control of the senate
ii) Middle ground voters that want split Gov't.
iii) Demotivated MAGA that won't come out.
I don't think group (ii) is actually that big. So the Dems could win it.
I have split the remaining votes to come into three piles - Philly, other D counties and Republican counties.
I get Philly to come based on the NYT at 244K, the other D counties around 155K and the Republican counties at c. 278K.
I then split VBMs 80/20 for Philly, two thirds for the other D counties and 50/50 for the R counties (many of these are strongholds, some are not).
That gets me to 438K Dem votes 239K Reps so 199K Dem vote advantage. Trump's lead is 164K so 35K would be Biden's lead but you then have to add all the extra votes from counties at 95%+ and where the Republicans have an advantage and many of which are strongholds. You also mentioned Clarion which will eat into Biden's lead by a few thousands.
So, yes Biden, may do it but it is not the slam dunk you say it is
The key to winning elections is to Get Out The Vote, not to try and stop people from voting.
It is good that a President that put more effort into suppressing and discrediting votes has lost an election with the highest ever turnout.
If its 700k Biden needs to be winning 60%
If its 488k he needs to be winning 67-68% to win.
As of last night Biden was winning 78% of the mail-in count
If we want to comply with WTO we cant waive customs checks.
If we decide waiving custom checks for a short period is more important than following WTO rules, we will do so and there wont be significant consequences from it.
But if the lorry parks aren't ready yet (which is RochdalePioneers argument) then I am saying we can simply disapply those checks if that is what we choose to do so for six months if that is what we want to do.
The WTO may want checks applied consistently but even if a dispute was raised by a non-EU nation then frankly the WTO process takes years to get through - by the end of that process the lorry parks will be ready.
So the problem that Rochdale thinks is a deal breaker is actually a fiction. If we wanted to we could leave on No Deal on 1/1/21, get the lorry parks up and running by 1/7/21 and say that we will spend three months testing them and the checks come in properly 1/9/21 . . . and if we do that there is nothing the WTO can do about that. No dispute would be settled in that timescale.
I can foresee plenty of money and a big GOTV from both sides.
Edit: I see @TimT Has made a similar observation.
Although I don't buy the de-motivated MAGA argument. Unless Trump somehow clings on.
Yes from 2 Dec (4 weeks today
A 'nationally agreed' solution for 24 Dec to 3 Jan Christmas/New Year for socialising.
Then back on the lockdown - similar to what we have now - mid Jan to end Feb, say 6 weeks.
Yes Furlough will be extended to 31 March 2021 at 80%. (Just in case we need a lockdown extended to March, quite possible)
Seriously, look at a last gen Vectra. Plenty of them about. The Vauxhall badge falls off cos crap glue and underneath is a panel shaped for the Opel badge.
Surely they can wrap it up today??
If you're going to have lockdown for a month then I would vote for that to be January.
Polls simply don't do well when turnout is significantly different to usual. They are very poor at predicting who the extra voters are, and what their motivation is.
https://twitter.com/Freedland/status/1324280879561232385?s=20
https://twitter.com/Govgg/status/1324320891921195010?s=20
Look Snyder County. Voted 72/24 For Trump in 2016 and 75/24 for Trump in 2020.
The mail ballots split 60/40 in Biden's favour.
The Mail Ballots will not be 80/20 in Philly. They were 85/12 in Delaware and Philly is VASTLY MORE Democrat than Delaware. It is not 66/33 in other Dem Counties.
You are using rough approximations for number of ballots outstanding when preciswe figures are available here: https://www.votespa.com/About-Elections/Pages/Counting-Dashboard.aspx there are 763331 ballots outstanding.
If we waive our right to do checks and let all traffic pass through as now on EU terms and tariffs then what has changed? The government keep telling industry that time is running out to make changes for the new order. But won't say what the new order is or what has to be changed. So almost nothing is being done. So we will absolutely leave the border open because we can't physically close it.
That is the deal we will have. The right to go our own way. At some unspecified point in the future. Whilst staying exactly where we are for an indefinite time. Which is why industry is doing three parts of nothing to prepare for changes because the industry has concluded that there won't be any.
So, don't diss January!
1/1/21 = 1 January 2021
1/7/21 or as I wrote in text "six months" later = 1 July 2021
1/9/21 or as I wrote in text "three months" later = 1 September 2021 [this was a brainfart, of course three months later is 1/10/21]
How is that American? American style would have been 1/1/21, 7/1/21 and 9/1/21 respectively.
Unless you thought I was suggesting we disapply the checks for a grand total of 9 days and not 9 months.
Several reasons, though, to think the 2024 scenario won't happen:
1. I'm not sure we're in the realm of protecting the Trump Presidency any more, and we're into protecting the Trump Ego. It's very important to his fragile psyche that he is not a "Loser" (mainly due to deep-seated daddy issues). So what he wants to achieve now is a self image of someone who didn't lose. Once he's done that, I am not sure he wants to go again in 2024. As far as he is concerned, he ran twice and won twice.
2. Trump has major and energy-sapping legal and financial problems to worry about over the next four years. It's not a question of heading back to Mar-a-Largo and plotting sweet revenge - he's got big personal issues to deal with.
3. He will be 78 (same age as Biden in a fortnight). I have to admire his energy at 74, but the difference between 74 and 78 isn't the same as the difference between 34 and 38. Typically, age really starts taking its toll at that stage - he viciously made that point about Biden, and wasn't totally wrong.
4. Memories do fade, and relevance does diminish. He's a newsworthy guy, and has a loyal following. But it all just matters less when he isn't making presidential proclamations, introducing legislation, hiring and firing powerful people, meeting the great dictators and so on. He becomes a prolific tweeter and social influencer - which is fine and not by any means irrelevant - but just isn't the same.
5. The leadership of the GOP will be keen to move on. They might struggle with that with a lot of their supporters, and it didn't ultimately stop Trump in 2016, but they do want to move on. The McConnells of this world know incumbent Presidents shouldn't really lose, that he was a nightmare to work with, and that he lost the popular vote twice. So they might not succeed in stopping the Second Coming, but won't be working to facilitate it.
Can Boris announce my good people of Suffolk, cotswolds, London, my government grants you Christmas, but for those of you in Redcar, Darlington, Stockton, Christmas is cancelled?
Politically he can’t can he. Whatever Christmas and New Year restrictions are, we all have to be in it together?
I am afraid not, if it notices you from outside the US it redirects. Maybe try a VPN? I have been going off twitter and reddit screenshots
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-georgia.html
Just because we can do checks doesn't mean we have to do them.
We don't want a closed border, nobody is saying deal or no deal that we will have a closed border.
Come on Joe!!!
I keep coming back to the elephant in the room. All these students who have been kettled in their pox factories all term. Off they go back home for Christmas. See their parents and siblings and grandparents and relatives. We're going to need furlough in the new year because the spike in January is going to be brutal.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3095822#Comment_3095822
With hindsight it shows the trajectory we were on in partisan terms. Bush Snr was able to offer his concession and his supporters accepted and admired the magnanimous words. By McCain's time, a fair number of supporters didn't want any positive words said about their opponent. Now, the defeated candidate actively orchestrates the hate.
Its a shame CNN is the only US channel on Sky. It would be fun to mix between CNN and Fox, I'd love to see how Fox are taking this.