Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
Betfair still seems to be giving Trump an implied probability not much under 10%. I wonder what that's based on.
Not everyone runs the rollong numbers like the kind of political nerd on this site. You wake up and the raw figures say he's ahead in GA and PA and you thnk "wow, that's a bargain". You need to look at the rolling averages and votes remaining to see that the odds are overwhelmingly with Biden in both states at the moment.
Indeed, to bet on politics you need a cool analytical approach where you don't let you hatred or love of a candidate overwhelm you. Bet with the head not the heart is what I always say. Don't let your emotions or personal preference get I the way.
And for sure don't turn up at 5 in the morning while the count is ongoing to hurl our insults only never to be seen again.
Which is why I don't bet on politics. I started reading, and eventually commenting, on this site after I read a couple of articles pumpiing the accuracy of betting markets as predictors of political events, as was the vogue up until about 5 years ago. Now that's been debunked, not sure why I'm still here TBH.
I never bet, which is why I rarely post, but I frequently lurk. I come here for the analysis and information (and the banter & puns). It's like being in a pub with a lot of (usually) interesting conversations going on around you. And when I want to check whether anything is happening in the world, this is the first place I look. It's a great site and I'm really glad I found it (over 10 years ago now). Many thanks to Mike and all who keep the site running.
And good morning, everybody.
Surely the value of the site, in betting terms, is the difference between the market prices and what is actually likely (or even possible) to happen. As pointed out here....
Strong reasoned tips on this site do frequently move the betting markets (perhaps not the US pres outright due to sheer weight of money but most smaller markets ) - Therefore anyone giving them needs to get on before. I find the best use of this site is not necessarily up front tips (as the value may go by their very publication ) but analysis and information that you can use to draw your own conclusions certain markets are wrong.
Yes - not so much specific tips as people pointing out facts/sources of information.
Betfair still seems to be giving Trump an implied probability not much under 10%. I wonder what that's based on.
Not everyone runs the rollong numbers like the kind of political nerd on this site. You wake up and the raw figures say he's ahead in GA and PA and you thnk "wow, that's a bargain". You need to look at the rolling averages and votes remaining to see that the odds are overwhelmingly with Biden in both states at the moment.
Indeed, to bet on politics you need a cool analytical approach where you don't let you hatred or love of a candidate overwhelm you. Bet with the head not the heart is what I always say. Don't let your emotions or personal preference get I the way.
And for sure don't turn up at 5 in the morning while the count is ongoing to hurl our insults only never to be seen again.
Which is why I don't bet on politics. I started reading, and eventually commenting, on this site after I read a couple of articles pumpiing the accuracy of betting markets as predictors of political events, as was the vogue up until about 5 years ago. Now that's been debunked, not sure why I'm still here TBH.
I never bet, which is why I rarely post, but I frequently lurk. I come here for the analysis and information (and the banter & puns). It's like being in a pub with a lot of (usually) interesting conversations going on around you. And when I want to check whether anything is happening in the world, this is the first place I look. It's a great site and I'm really glad I found it (over 10 years ago now). Many thanks to Mike and all who keep the site running.
And good morning, everybody.
Surely the value of the site, in betting terms, is the difference between the market prices and what is actually likely (or even possible) to happen. As pointed out here....
That must be right, and it was exemplified on the night of the EU referendum. The famous spreadsheet devised by @AndyJS made all the difference. For the non-bettor, that's the reason the analysis is so worthwhile; it really does matter in the real world.
Betfair still seems to be giving Trump an implied probability not much under 10%. I wonder what that's based on.
Not everyone runs the rollong numbers like the kind of political nerd on this site. You wake up and the raw figures say he's ahead in GA and PA and you thnk "wow, that's a bargain". You need to look at the rolling averages and votes remaining to see that the odds are overwhelmingly with Biden in both states at the moment.
Indeed, to bet on politics you need a cool analytical approach where you don't let you hatred or love of a candidate overwhelm you. Bet with the head not the heart is what I always say. Don't let your emotions or personal preference get I the way.
And for sure don't turn up at 5 in the morning while the count is ongoing to hurl our insults only never to be seen again.
Which is why I don't bet on politics. I started reading, and eventually commenting, on this site after I read a couple of articles pumpiing the accuracy of betting markets as predictors of political events, as was the vogue up until about 5 years ago. Now that's been debunked, not sure why I'm still here TBH.
I never bet, which is why I rarely post, but I frequently lurk. I come here for the analysis and information (and the banter & puns). It's like being in a pub with a lot of (usually) interesting conversations going on around you. And when I want to check whether anything is happening in the world, this is the first place I look. It's a great site and I'm really glad I found it (over 10 years ago now). Many thanks to Mike and all who keep the site running.
And good morning, everybody.
Surely the value of the site, in betting terms, is the difference between the market prices and what is actually likely (or even possible) to happen. As pointed out here....
Imagine if there been someone saying to pile on Penn when it was @3.85
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
The projections on Wednesday p.m. were that Trump is in third place all time with Biden 2020 AND Obama 2008 having more votes. I don't know if that is still accurate though.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
Betting post: I tipped this earlier (at 7:48) but I`ll mention again. There is money available at 1.33 on BF`s "Electoral College Vote H'cap - 48.5" market.
Biden in heading for 306 v 232 if he wins all four close states (Arizona, Georgia, Penn and Nevada). Margin 74.
If he loses Arizona the margin will be 52.
So either way -48.5 will be settle as a Biden win. Take the 1.33.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
Between 8000 and 9000 sent out - the precise number was given in yesterday's presser
Betfair still seems to be giving Trump an implied probability not much under 10%. I wonder what that's based on.
Not everyone runs the rollong numbers like the kind of political nerd on this site. You wake up and the raw figures say he's ahead in GA and PA and you thnk "wow, that's a bargain". You need to look at the rolling averages and votes remaining to see that the odds are overwhelmingly with Biden in both states at the moment.
Indeed, to bet on politics you need a cool analytical approach where you don't let you hatred or love of a candidate overwhelm you. Bet with the head not the heart is what I always say. Don't let your emotions or personal preference get I the way.
And for sure don't turn up at 5 in the morning while the count is ongoing to hurl our insults only never to be seen again.
Which is why I don't bet on politics. I started reading, and eventually commenting, on this site after I read a couple of articles pumpiing the accuracy of betting markets as predictors of political events, as was the vogue up until about 5 years ago. Now that's been debunked, not sure why I'm still here TBH.
I have found PB to be an excellent resource, particularly at election times. It is the go-to place to come for the most up-to-date predictions, particularly, when for example the BBC and Sky are hours behind. This time more helpful than ever. Thanks to OGH.
Hats off, in particular to Alistair (who's PA prediction of a circa150,000 Biden win when all looked lost to the untrained eye was a crumb of comfort) also thanks to RCS and Mysticrose. Great predictions from peak Trump by all. There are others too, but my stand outs throughout the last three days of madness.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
And they're not particularly splitting for Trump anyway. Surprising as it may seem.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
At teh end of 2016, Obama was very civilised and restrained, meeting Trump in the white house and handing over in an ordely manner, considering tht Trump had spent the last 8 years claiming that Obama had no right to be president.
Will Trump be as gracious handing over to Biden? Will he f*&%.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
I’m not sure they would make a huge difference: I think they broke for Clinton last time and after some of Trump’s remarks I’m not sure he will do any better this time.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
Yes, and that goes for the media`s repeated chanting on Biden`s "over 70m votes" crap. Prior to the election turnout estimates were as high as 160m. It was obvious that Biden would get over 70m. He should be well over 80m. So, actually, the number is on the disappointing side.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Yep Ford doesn't count as he wasn't elected in the first place
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Yep Ford doesn't count as he wasn't elected in the first place
Ford doesn't count as his party had won two terms already so he was seeking a third term for his party not a second. Same reason HW Bush doesn't count, he was seeking a fourth term for his party not a second.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
99% in could mean 5,000 votes left, or 2,000. In the former case it could change. Plus those in the post? Military - about 8,000 sent out
The total is approaching 5 million, so 99% could mean 50,000 (or even 75,000) still to come. I note that NYT actually says ">98%", not 99%.
But based on an estimate of the actual numbers posted on 538 about 3am our time (and obviously adjusting for votes reported since then) there would be about 14,900 still to come. That seems consistent with the number of 62,000 that was announced last night.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Ford was an incumbent but was not up for reelection. You could also argue that LBJ was an incumbent seeking reelection in 68, but he pulled out during the primaries.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Yep Ford doesn't count as he wasn't elected in the first place
Ford doesn't count as his party had won two terms already so he was seeking a third term for his party not a second. Same reason HW Bush doesn't count, he was seeking a fourth term for his party not a second.
You are using the HYUFD argument. The talk in this thread is about presidents not parties.
Betfair still seems to be giving Trump an implied probability not much under 10%. I wonder what that's based on.
Not everyone runs the rollong numbers like the kind of political nerd on this site. You wake up and the raw figures say he's ahead in GA and PA and you thnk "wow, that's a bargain". You need to look at the rolling averages and votes remaining to see that the odds are overwhelmingly with Biden in both states at the moment.
Indeed, to bet on politics you need a cool analytical approach where you don't let you hatred or love of a candidate overwhelm you. Bet with the head not the heart is what I always say. Don't let your emotions or personal preference get I the way.
And for sure don't turn up at 5 in the morning while the count is ongoing to hurl our insults only never to be seen again.
Which is why I don't bet on politics. I started reading, and eventually commenting, on this site after I read a couple of articles pumpiing the accuracy of betting markets as predictors of political events, as was the vogue up until about 5 years ago. Now that's been debunked, not sure why I'm still here TBH.
I never bet, which is why I rarely post, but I frequently lurk. I come here for the analysis and information (and the banter & puns). It's like being in a pub with a lot of (usually) interesting conversations going on around you. And when I want to check whether anything is happening in the world, this is the first place I look. It's a great site and I'm really glad I found it (over 10 years ago now). Many thanks to Mike and all who keep the site running.
And good morning, everybody.
Surely the value of the site, in betting terms, is the difference between the market prices and what is actually likely (or even possible) to happen. As pointed out here....
Imagine if there been someone saying to pile on Penn when it was @3.85
Yep. I got on at 3.35
I`ve just checked and best I got on Dems in Penn was 2.2. But I also laid the Reps at 3.4.
My best single bet I guess would be £25 at 14/1 Biden next president with PP. That was way back obvs.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Ford was an incumbent but was not up for reelection. You could also argue that LBJ was an incumbent seeking reelection in 68, but he pulled out during the primaries.
Ford - the forgotten man whose positions of the earlier '70s give so many insights into what changed on the Anglo-American right. He thought Reagan was too conservative, excluding and unconsensual to win.
Hannity looking for a "do over" on the basis observers have been kept out of the Pennsylvania election count.
But they weren't. Did he not see the court case?
He's in meltdown. It fills the time while the ink on the new votes dries.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt....
What Donald Fucking Trump is doing is creating a story where he is the winner. But was robbed.
It only needs to be true between his ears. Enough idiots will believe it and he can survive* by bathing in their adulation.
*Not collapse in a heap and get taken away
In fairness, even in defeat, Trump is going to win more votes than any Republican in history. His vote is significantly up on 2016. He succeeded in motivating and turning out his base. It's just that he motivated his opponents even more.
I'm guessing Trump 2020 has won more votes than any other candidate in history, except for Biden 2020?
Can we please put this to bed once and for all? The population of the US grows, you know?! There are 100 million more people than 1960 and 290 million more than 1790. The 'raw' numbers argument is UTTERLY fallacious.
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
It's not completely nonsense. The three 20th century incumbents who were defeated (Hoover, Carter, Bush I) all lost millions of votes between elections, despite the growth in the size of the electorate.
Trump has added 6.6 million votes so far. That's a huge difference and very notable.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
The problem is it wasn't nonsense.
Its a real shame RBG died.
I meant the idea of appointing additional justices. It does not seem to have been popular.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Yep Ford doesn't count as he wasn't elected in the first place
Ford doesn't count as his party had won two terms already so he was seeking a third term for his party not a second. Same reason HW Bush doesn't count, he was seeking a fourth term for his party not a second.
You are using the HYUFD argument. The talk in this thread is about presidents not parties.
No the reply I was replying to then was replying to this and party was explicitly mentioned:
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Georgia: Remember that there are still military votes to come in.
I think they are also breaking for Biden.
The US military is not a particularly reactionary organisation. It was desegregated under Eisenhower, I believe. It's not surprising to see it split for Biden.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
99% in could mean 5,000 votes left, or 2,000. In the former case it could change. Plus those in the post? Military - about 8,000 sent out
The total is approaching 5 million, so 99% could mean 50,000 (or even 75,000) still to come. I note that NYT actually says ">98%", not 99%.
But based on an estimate of the actual numbers posted on 538 about 3am our time (and obviously adjusting for votes reported since then) there would be about 14,900 still to come. That seems consistent with the number of 62,000 that was announced last night.
True, I shouldnt try mental arithmetic so early.
Although I have a feeling that "99%" just means they haven't formally finished, rather than 99.5% or less - as indeed your figure confirms.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
The problem is it wasn't nonsense.
Its a real shame RBG died.
I meant the idea of appointing additional justices. It does not seem to have been popular.
Appointing additional justices wasn't nonsense though given the shenanigans the GOP had pulled.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
It would be interesting to see some polling next year on what were the most salient reasons for people voting the way they did. Watching from afar, it looked like there were a huge number of gaffes from both candidates and their parties during the campaign.
Maybe a President from one party and the Senate majority with the other is the starting point for a more consensual politics in the next few years.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Yep Ford doesn't count as he wasn't elected in the first place
Ford doesn't count as his party had won two terms already so he was seeking a third term for his party not a second. Same reason HW Bush doesn't count, he was seeking a fourth term for his party not a second.
You are using the HYUFD argument. The talk in this thread is about presidents not parties.
No the reply I was replying to then was replying to this and party was explicitly mentioned:
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Please. You can read as well as I can. The original statement from MysticRose was "It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. "
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
99% in could mean 5,000 votes left, or 2,000. In the former case it could change. Plus those in the post? Military - about 8,000 sent out
The total is approaching 5 million, so 99% could mean 50,000 (or even 75,000) still to come. I note that NYT actually says ">98%", not 99%.
But based on an estimate of the actual numbers posted on 538 about 3am our time (and obviously adjusting for votes reported since then) there would be about 14,900 still to come. That seems consistent with the number of 62,000 that was announced last night.
True, I shouldnt try mental arithmetic so early.
Although I have a feeling that "99%" just means they haven't formally finished, rather than 99.5% or less - as indeed your figure confirms.
Yes - I would hope they wouldn't show "100%" as soon as it got to 99.5%!
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
The problem is it wasn't nonsense.
Its a real shame RBG died.
I meant the idea of appointing additional justices. It does not seem to have been popular.
...and packing SCOTUS with Gorsuch, Coney-Barrett and the previously dubious Kavanagh is popular?
Honestly can’t get over how David Cameron’s ‘blue sky thinker’ who apparently once voted Green and was seen as part of your ‘modernisation’ of the Conservative Party, is now a Trump supporter on Fox.
I assume Trump is refusing to go quietly and has turned the once great USA into a banana republic
He is an utter disgrace and hopefully he will be removed soon, but the number of votes he has accumulated is astonishing and the cult of Trump looks like it will fester in USA politics for years to come sadly
I am not convinced by Biden but like Boris last year anyone will do to see off Trump as was the case with Corbyn
I do find it disturbing though that Sky and Burley have been broadcasting the US election for nearly 10 days and almost exclusively virtually ignoring the UK, but fair play to the BBC they have been much more sensible in their coverage of the US and UK domestic issues, of which there are so many
Honestly can’t get over how David Cameron’s ‘blue sky thinker’ who apparently once voted Green and was seen as part of your ‘modernisation’ of the Conservative Party, is now a Trump supporter on Fox.
It's the cult of "anti-elitism". Hilton genuinely believes himself to be an anti-elitist.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
I’m not sure they would make a huge difference: I think they broke for Clinton last time and after some of Trump’s remarks I’m not sure he will do any better this time.
It's hard to call, Trump says offensive shit about war heroes etc, OTOH he hasn't sent them off to any new wars, and this time he seems to be doing better than before with both low-education white people and black people.
Fraser Nelson, normally a cool observer of events, can barely contain his anger and disbelief at this week's disgrace over the stats used to justify lockdown 2.0 and the total lack of balance between covid and wider issues.
"I understand that, even now, there is no internal assessment that balances the total damage of lockdown – to the economy, society and public health – against the lives it seeks to save. To plunge Britain into lockdown without making this basic assessment is extraordinary."
Telegraph, on other pages, details the outrageous use of out of date stats and false projections that were used on Saturday night to scare England into another lockdown.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
I have every confidence that the GOP will find someone just as toxic, if a little less moronic.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
What a lot of ramping. Sounds like you got out of bed with a very sore loser head.
It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. The economy was a significant factor. He really ramped up the 401(k) issue which is crucial for many Americans: some 50% own stocks and shares (31% have 401(k)) and as he has bigged-up his Wall St credentials, it was a significant factor.
Yeah I'm one of those sore losers who bet on Biden and very much wanted him to win. Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the planet not being completely ruined and Biden is the only candidate who might do something about it, which I am a little sore about.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Ford was an incumbent but was not up for reelection. You could also argue that LBJ was an incumbent seeking reelection in 68, but he pulled out during the primaries.
Ford - the forgotten man whose positions of the earlier '70s give so many insights into what changed on the Anglo-American right. He thought Reagan was too conservative, excluding and unconsensual to win.
I have plugged this before but if you're interested in the ideological battles of the 1970s in both parties then the TV series on iplayer Mrs America is a must-see. Even if you're not interested in the politics and history it is a brilliant story and there are some great performances.
Honestly can’t get over how David Cameron’s ‘blue sky thinker’ who apparently once voted Green and was seen as part of your ‘modernisation’ of the Conservative Party, is now a Trump supporter on Fox.
He was peddling the same Red Tory "left wing economy, right wing culture" line he's had all along
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
The problem is it wasn't nonsense.
Its a real shame RBG died.
I meant the idea of appointing additional justices. It does not seem to have been popular.
...and packing SCOTUS with Gorsuch, Coney-Barrett and the previously dubious Kavanagh is popular?
It was a political failure for the Democrats that the debate moved onto the unreasonable measures they might take to correct for unreasonable Republican measures, rather than stayed on the unreasonable Republican measures.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
I’m not sure they would make a huge difference: I think they broke for Clinton last time and after some of Trump’s remarks I’m not sure he will do any better this time.
It's hard to call, Trump says offensive shit about war heroes etc, OTOH he hasn't sent them off to any new wars, and this time he seems to be doing better than before with both low-education white people and black people.
But the US forces aren’t low education, they also don’t like their officers dragged of their ship for trying to protect the crew from covid.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
And they're not particularly splitting for Trump anyway. Surprising as it may seem.
Perhaps Trump insulting the troops? Perhaps reflecting ethnicity? Or perhaps wanting a more interventionist foreign policy? -troops quite like action.
I assume Trump is refusing to go quietly and has turned the once great USA into a banana republic
He is an utter disgrace and hopefully he will be removed soon, but the number of votes he has accumulated is astonishing and the cult of Trump looks like it will fester in USA politics for years to come sadly
I am not convinced by Biden but like Boris last year anyone will do to see off Trump as was the case with Corbyn
I do find it disturbing though that Sky and Burley have been broadcasting the US election for nearly 10 days and almost exclusively virtually ignoring the UK, but fair play to the BBC they have been much more sensible in their coverage of the US and UK domestic issues, of which there are so many
But you don’t like ‘our Kay’ in fact anything you say is colored by your view of her. She is annoying but they are covering something that will out live covid and is far more interesting. Trying to follow what the UK government is doing is close to impossible because five minutes latter it changes.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
I’m not sure they would make a huge difference: I think they broke for Clinton last time and after some of Trump’s remarks I’m not sure he will do any better this time.
It's hard to call, Trump says offensive shit about war heroes etc, OTOH he hasn't sent them off to any new wars, and this time he seems to be doing better than before with both low-education white people and black people.
But the US forces aren’t low education, they also don’t like their officers dragged of their ship for trying to protect the crew from covid.
He was dragged off the ship for breaking the chain of command. There was no way he could stay after that. He also implied that the ship wasn't "ready to fight tonight". That is as big a trangression as it's possible to make.
I`ve enjoyed watching the CNN coverage but they are openly biased against Trump.
I think they've been quite restrained actually
I think they're openly biased against people trying to say that votes shouldn't be counted, or that people in a humvee should be trying to break into counting centres.
So the message I'm getting is Trump shouldn't have taken his support in the rust belt for granted and should have crafted a policy vision more in tune with their concerns and economic anxiety?
He would have won if he had appealed more to libs in the cities.
I was very confident that Trump would lose well before the virus hit. But on reflection I was wrong. I think he would have won but for Covid.
The clincher in this election was not so much people changing minds, it was much more to do with turnout. And the provisions which permitted postal voting en masse is what did for him in the end.
And sadly the lesson the GOP will draw is that they need to double down on voter suppression next time round
Yes. The logically inconsistent double will be to restrict mail-in ballots (because they slow down the count), and cut back on in-person polling stations (in Democrat areas) because on the day turnout was so low in 2020.
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Well they didn't get it and I can't help feeling that that pack the Court nonsense did not help them in the Senate races.
The problem is it wasn't nonsense.
Its a real shame RBG died.
I meant the idea of appointing additional justices. It does not seem to have been popular.
I wonder if Biden with a Dem House get blocked at every turn like Obama AND if the Supreme Court do act very partisan (I'm still not 100% convinced it will) then the 2022 mid terms could cause a 2nd blue wave. Of course there might be a red wave to counter it to stop the "libtards"
So not only is Johnson one of the most incompetent Prime Ministers most of us can remember he goes and backs the wrong horse in a two horse race after gambling our future on the outcome
True but a very powerful dissection of what was just a pack of lies and self pity. And by the way I wonder how all the Rep voters whose votes were counted late, Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions feel about knowing the guy they voted for feels their votes are illegal too.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
I have every confidence that the GOP will find someone just as toxic, if a little less moronic.
Might be tricky.
The art with that sort of demagoguery is to say outrageous things with just the right balance of blokeish twinkle and menace. Some sort of sugar to make the poison go down. Pence saying Trump's lines wouldn't work.
For example, UKIP never found a satisfactory Farage replacement.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
I’m not sure they would make a huge difference: I think they broke for Clinton last time and after some of Trump’s remarks I’m not sure he will do any better this time.
It's hard to call, Trump says offensive shit about war heroes etc, OTOH he hasn't sent them off to any new wars, and this time he seems to be doing better than before with both low-education white people and black people.
But the US forces aren’t low education, they also don’t like their officers dragged of their ship for trying to protect the crew from covid.
Aren't they low-education? Sorry, maybe you're right, I haven't looked it up. I figured most of the numbers were people who graduated High School then went straight into a job (the military) which for most values of $job is a very Trumpish demographic, but maybe I'm out-of-date.
I assume Trump is refusing to go quietly and has turned the once great USA into a banana republic
He is an utter disgrace and hopefully he will be removed soon, but the number of votes he has accumulated is astonishing and the cult of Trump looks like it will fester in USA politics for years to come sadly
I am not convinced by Biden but like Boris last year anyone will do to see off Trump as was the case with Corbyn
I do find it disturbing though that Sky and Burley have been broadcasting the US election for nearly 10 days and almost exclusively virtually ignoring the UK, but fair play to the BBC they have been much more sensible in their coverage of the US and UK domestic issues, of which there are so many
But you don’t like ‘our Kay’ in fact anything you say is colored by your view of her. She is annoying but they are covering something that will out live covid and is far more interesting. Trying to follow what the UK government is doing is close to impossible because five minutes latter it changes.
I would suggest most ordinary members of the public have far more concern for the issues here in the UK affecting their health, wealth and even freedoms, and while having an interest in the outcome they are not obsessives about politics nor the USA
I assume Trump is refusing to go quietly and has turned the once great USA into a banana republic
He is an utter disgrace and hopefully he will be removed soon, but the number of votes he has accumulated is astonishing and the cult of Trump looks like it will fester in USA politics for years to come sadly
I am not convinced by Biden but like Boris last year anyone will do to see off Trump as was the case with Corbyn
I do find it disturbing though that Sky and Burley have been broadcasting the US election for nearly 10 days and almost exclusively virtually ignoring the UK, but fair play to the BBC they have been much more sensible in their coverage of the US and UK domestic issues, of which there are so many
It's like Trump said, after 3rd December no one would be talking about Covid, Covid, Covid, just Trump.
It'd be funny if rules made by Republican state legislatures to allow late-arriving mail in ballots to count - because they thought it would benefit Republicans (and maybe did in the past) - give the election to Biden.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
I have every confidence that the GOP will find someone just as toxic, if a little less moronic.
Might be tricky.
The art with that sort of demagoguery is to say outrageous things with just the right balance of blokeish twinkle and menace. Some sort of sugar to make the poison go down. Pence saying Trump's lines wouldn't work.
For example, UKIP never found a satisfactory Farage replacement.
Very good point. Trump is a master of the American equivalent of 'just banter'.
Where are we? Has Biden managed it it GA. Looks like he will be short on first glance.
I think he takes it. There are a few thousand votes left (not sure how many) and the gap is in the triple figures now. I suspect he’ll do it by 1000 or so, maybe even more.
Thank goodness Biden is going to win PA - I would have been VERY nervous if the election had come to down to GA given the past behaviour of the GOP there.
I think Biden wins too just but as I understand it theres still the military ones to come in so if its just a few hundred lead for Biden it could change things, not sure how many M ones there are though, few thousand at least I think?
And they're not particularly splitting for Trump anyway. Surprising as it may seem.
Perhaps Trump insulting the troops? Perhaps reflecting ethnicity? Or perhaps wanting a more interventionist foreign policy? -troops quite like action.
And of course if they break the wrong way for him, their votes are illegal too.
Betting post: I tipped this earlier (at 7:48) but I`ll mention again. There is money available at 1.33 on BF`s "Electoral College Vote H'cap - 48.5" market.
Biden in heading for 306 v 232 if he wins all four close states (Arizona, Georgia, Penn and Nevada). Margin 74.
If he loses Arizona the margin will be 52.
So either way -48.5 will be settle as a Biden win. Take the 1.33.
I had been very sceptical of the Democrat campaign (from an ocean away, so what the **** do I know?) but I genuinely cannot believe they failed to win a landslide victory against the worst President in my lifetime, a man who is clearly suffering from some form of cognitive decline and who was literally recorded bragging about sexual assault. The Democrats are going to get obliterated in 2024 when they're up against any Republican less toxic than Trump (which is any Republican).
I have every confidence that the GOP will find someone just as toxic, if a little less moronic.
Might be tricky.
The art with that sort of demagoguery is to say outrageous things with just the right balance of blokeish twinkle and menace. Some sort of sugar to make the poison go down. Pence saying Trump's lines wouldn't work.
For example, UKIP never found a satisfactory Farage replacement.
Yes, also Trump didn't *only* win with the demagoguery. He also spent years playing a highly successful businessman on TV. He definitely has a lot of supporters who rate him there and merely *tolerate* the bigotry.
Comments
Its only a matter of time now surely?
By all means go by percentage share of the vote but cut the nonsense about total number please.
https://www.census-charts.com/Population/pop-us-1790-2000.html
Biden in heading for 306 v 232 if he wins all four close states (Arizona, Georgia, Penn and Nevada). Margin 74.
If he loses Arizona the margin will be 52.
So either way -48.5 will be settle as a Biden win. Take the 1.33.
Hats off, in particular to Alistair (who's PA prediction of a circa150,000 Biden win when all looked lost to the untrained eye was a crumb of comfort) also thanks to RCS and Mysticrose. Great predictions from peak Trump by all. There are others too, but my stand outs throughout the last three days of madness.
Thanks again.
Not that it really matters but you are completely, embarrassingly wrong about the number of defeated incumbents; 12 incumbent presidents failed to be reelected (Adams, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, Pierce, Johnson, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, and H. W. Bush).
The main issue as I see it is that the Democrats had an open goal against a terrible President, and they still failed to pull off a decisive victory. I am terrified of what will happen when the Trumpish tendency in American politics rallies behind a vaguely competent candidate.
Will Trump be as gracious handing over to Biden? Will he f*&%.
Carter
Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
This is one of many reasons why the Democrats needed a crushing victory, all the way down the ballot, to turn this around.
Edit - others have already remembered!
But based on an estimate of the actual numbers posted on 538 about 3am our time (and obviously adjusting for votes reported since then) there would be about 14,900 still to come. That seems consistent with the number of 62,000 that was announced last night.
Its a real shame RBG died.
My best single bet I guess would be £25 at 14/1 Biden next president with PP. That was way back obvs.
Trump has added 6.6 million votes so far. That's a huge difference and very notable.
Since the start of the 20th Century the only incumbent Presidents who failed to be re-elected, when their party only gained the Oval Office at the previous election is as follows:
Carter
Trump
That is it.
(For the record 11 times the party that first won the Oval Office at the previous election managed to hold onto it)
Although I have a feeling that "99%" just means they haven't formally finished, rather than 99.5% or less - as indeed your figure confirms.
May not have been popular but wasn't nonsense.
Maybe a President from one party and the Senate majority with the other is the starting point for a more consensual politics in the next few years.
"It's not often that an incumbent is defeated (only thrice before in American history) and, for all his faults, Trump's record on the economy was impressive, at least on paper. "
It says incumbent, not incumbent party.
I assume Trump is refusing to go quietly and has turned the once great USA into a banana republic
He is an utter disgrace and hopefully he will be removed soon, but the number of votes he has accumulated is astonishing and the cult of Trump looks like it will fester in USA politics for years to come sadly
I am not convinced by Biden but like Boris last year anyone will do to see off Trump as was the case with Corbyn
I do find it disturbing though that Sky and Burley have been broadcasting the US election for nearly 10 days and almost exclusively virtually ignoring the UK, but fair play to the BBC they have been much more sensible in their coverage of the US and UK domestic issues, of which there are so many
"I understand that, even now, there is no internal assessment that balances the total damage of lockdown – to the economy, society and public health – against the lives it seeks to save. To plunge Britain into lockdown without making this basic assessment is extraordinary."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/05/bounced-second-lockdown-didnt-want-borisjohnson-still-charge/
Telegraph, on other pages, details the outrageous use of out of date stats and false projections that were used on Saturday night to scare England into another lockdown.
The art with that sort of demagoguery is to say outrageous things with just the right balance of blokeish twinkle and menace. Some sort of sugar to make the poison go down. Pence saying Trump's lines wouldn't work.
For example, UKIP never found a satisfactory Farage replacement.
But I guess he's won without them.