politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clinton versus Trump: What men say their spouses will do and w

System · November 2016

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clinton versus Trump: What men say their spouses will do and what women in partnership actually say

Via @williamjordann Happy US families ahead of WH2016YouGov US: 33% of men say spouse supports Clinton compared with 45% who say they are pic.twitter.com/3XoNjKLW86

Read the full story here

IanB2 · November 2016

First like Farron....again!

Anorak · November 2016

Second like, erm, a sixtieth of a minute.

AnneJGP · November 2016

Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.

TheScreamingEagles · November 2016

IanB2 said:
First like Farron....again!

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/793385256820871168

Anorak · November 2016

Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?

Anorak · November 2016

TheScreamingEagles said:
Tories nc
Labour +1

Sleazy blah, blah, slide, etc.

TheScreamingEagles · November 2016

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.

The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language

JackW · November 2016

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.

FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..

Jobabob · November 2016

Those who care about reading my responses (to Peter, Jack etc) can find them on the old thread.

TheScreamingEagles · November 2016

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?

Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PB

SimonStClare · November 2016

Oh dear, Jill Stien appears to be totally ignored by both domestic partners…

Jobabob · November 2016

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.

It's referring to Carla Bruni's late tilt at the presidency.

Chris · November 2016

Alistair said:

Chris said:

brokenwheel said:

Chris said:

Chris said:

TonyE said:

Jobabob said:

Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."

Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.
A breach of the law would require either intent or gross negligence. Comey testified that there was insufficient evidence of intent, and said that in the circumstances no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case focused on gross negligence.

Of course he didn't testify that Clinton had broken the law. Read the transcript:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-odds-of-an-electoral-college-popular-vote-split-are-increasing/?ex_cid=2016-forecast
By pointing out a factual accuracy you will be labeled a Hilary sycophant

I had a fun evening of Hillary-ramping last night, and I can certainly see the appeal.

But this stuff about Comey is more downright absurd than factually inaccurate.Is it likely that the director of the FBI would testify to Congress that no prosecution should be brought against someone, but "declare" that they were guilty?

Morris_Dancer · November 2016

Doesn't this work just as well the other way around?

Good morning, Miss JGP.

SimonStClare · November 2016

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

brokenwheel · November 2016

That's tempting fate.

Anyway,
FPT

Chris said:

brokenwheel said:

Chris said:

Chris said:

TonyE said:

Jobabob said:

Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."

Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.
A breach of the law would require either intent or gross negligence. Comey testified that there was insufficient evidence of intent, and said that in the circumstances no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case focused on gross negligence.

Of course he didn't testify that Clinton had broken the law. Read the transcript:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-odds-of-an-electoral-college-popular-vote-split-are-increasing/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

I didn't say he testified that, he wouldn't say that because he claimed he could not prove intent. I said the things he admitted Clinton had done would be illegal if he could prove intent. Clinton rampers are trying to make out she did nothing wrong just because Comey wouldn't go for an indictment, but the reason not to go for an indictment has nothing to do with what she actually did.

MonikerDiCanio · November 2016

The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.

CarlottaVance · November 2016

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.

The mugs wrong.

Clinton was 'Madam Secretary of State' - she doesn't turn French by becoming President....

And good morning to you too!

Pulpstar · November 2016

I'm reading this is "Mɑːdɑːrm" rather than "Mədəm" with the added "e", as in a woman who heads up a brothel rather than the polite address form.

Theuniondivvie · November 2016

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?

As a sharp bettor I guess he would have an interest in mugs!

Anorak · November 2016

That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?

not_on_fire · November 2016

Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President

MikeSmithson · November 2016

MonikerDiCanio said:
The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.

So you support Mr Putin's puppy?

TheScreamingEagles · November 2016

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?

No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a vote

MikeSmithson · November 2016

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PB

Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.

not_on_fire · November 2016

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a vote

Indeed, and married voters are much more likely to vote Republican, especially women. Trump's 7% lead is low by historic standards for a Republican candidate.

MonikerDiCanio · November 2016

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?

It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.

Pulpstar · November 2016

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PB
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.

Nice of @JackW to pick one up for you there.

CarlottaVance · November 2016

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President

No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)

SimonStClare · November 2016

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President

The Clinton campaign are selling $6 buttons, which say “Madam President” – it sounds better.

MaxPB · November 2016

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?

Not all women are married!

Chris · November 2016

brokenwheel said:
That's tempting fate.

Anyway,
FPT

Chris said:

brokenwheel said:

Chris said:

Chris said:

TonyE said:

Jobabob said:

Er, you know they haven't read the emails right? You have zero evidence for your statement. None.
That's not what the FBI are looking for in all probability. When they dropped the investigation they declared that she had committed a criminal act (in using the unsecured server) but had failed the test of criminal intent in doing so. In the new emails, they will be looking for the intent element - the motive behind the use of the 'Bleaching' software, or any admission that Clinton and her staff knew that the operation of the server was illegal.
Only in Trumpland could someone reply to a comment saying the FBI hadn't read the emails by saying "that's not what the FBI are looking for". Why did Alec Baldwin have to take a week off?
To say nothing of the bizarre statement that the FNBI "declared that she had committed a criminal act ... but had failed the test of criminal intention."

Of course the FBI declared no such thing. But how could anyone think such a declaration could even make sense?
Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent and so did not recommend a grand jury/indictment. Problem is successful convictions for the same crimes have been made with less evidence of intent.
A breach of the law would require either intent or gross negligence. Comey testified that there was insufficient evidence of intent, and said that in the circumstances no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case focused on gross negligence.

Of course he didn't testify that Clinton had broken the law. Read the transcript:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-odds-of-an-electoral-college-popular-vote-split-are-increasing/?ex_cid=2016-forecast
I said the things he admitted Clinton had done would be illegal if he could prove intent.

You didn't. You said
"Comey admitted to the congressional committee that Clinton had committed acts that broke the law, but concluded he could not prove intent."

The point is that the acts would not have broken the law in the absence of intent or gross negligence.

Anorak · November 2016

not_on_fire said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
No. Not everyone in America is married, this is merely a subsample of married voters, even those who live in sin and fornicate have a vote
Indeed, and married voters are much more likely to vote Republican, especially women. Trump's 7% lead is low by historic standards for a Republican candidate.

Um. Yes, got it now. *feels burning shame*

TheWhiteRabbit · November 2016

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)

According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...

Theuniondivvie · November 2016

MonikerDiCanio said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.

Does this mean thrice married pussy grabbers will tend to vote for Hillary?

Lucian_Fletcher · November 2016

Interesting thought that being married (in USA) makes you more likely to be disappointed with your life and blame the Mexicans for your life being said disappointment.

FF43 · November 2016

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..

Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.

Anorak · November 2016

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
Not all women are married!

But surely they're not allowed to vote! Who would inform them of the correct person to vote for?

AnneJGP · November 2016

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language

Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?

Lucian_Fletcher · November 2016

Anorak said:

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
Not all women are married!
But surely they're not allowed to vote! Who would inform them of the correct person to vote for?

The nice men with baseball bats, caps and pickup trucks outside the polling stations.

Morris_Dancer · November 2016

Mr. Fletcher, one of the charming ways Sir Edric describes his wife is 'the wicked witch of wedlock'.

MaxPB · November 2016

Anorak said:

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
Not all women are married!
But surely they're not allowed to vote! Who would inform them of the correct person to vote for?

The Donald, of course!

DecrepitJohnL · November 2016

This discrepancy shows why cameras are normally banned from polling booths (to answer a Trump conspiracy theory from a few threads back).

Lucian_Fletcher · November 2016

Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Fletcher, one of the charming ways Sir Edric describes his wife is 'the wicked witch of wedlock'.

Rather good. Hope you are well this fine (cold, dark) morning.

CarlottaVance · November 2016

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...

According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame

TCPoliticalBetting · November 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3891996/Lib-Dem-donor-Rolls-Royce-bribery-scandal-Adviser-Tim-Farron-arrested-links-firms-receiving-payouts-engineering-giant.html

CarlottaVance · November 2016

AnneJGP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?

It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame

TheWhiteRabbit · November 2016

CarlottaVance said:

AnneJGP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?

It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame

According to that it would be Madam President, then. But I can't help but think that what Clinton (if elected) says will go.

Morris_Dancer · November 2016

Mr. Fletcher, thanks. I'm quite well... trying to juggle writing with nagging/pestering/approaching in a subtle and prudent manner potential reviewers for Kingdom Asunder.

[Unlikely, but if any are lurking here, ARCs are available].

TheScreamingEagles · November 2016

AnneJGP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?

When I was in New Orleans and other Southern states I noted the regular use of 'Madame'

Less so in places like California, New York, Boston, and the rest of New England

MP_SE · November 2016

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PB
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.

Do you own the infamous Labour immigration mug? I am gutted I never bought one when I had the chance.

TheWhiteRabbit · November 2016

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?
When I was in New Orleans and other Southern states I noted the regular use of 'Madame'

Less so in places like California, New York, Boston, and the rest of New England

Elsewhere I assume it is too tainted by the association with prostitution.

nunu · November 2016

MP_SE said:

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:
Quite a clever mug design - by simply scraping of the "ame" you can sell them following a Trump victory, too.

EDIT: second mug in three threads. Has OGH got an interest to declare?
Mike's got an impressive collection of political mugs and I'm not just talking about the posters below the line on PB
Indeed I collect political mugs and have a collection going back to the Great Reform Act in 1832.

Do you own the infamous Labour immigration mug? I am gutted I never bought one when I had the chance.

I don't get whats the big deal with that Labour mug, I agree with it?

CarlottaVance · November 2016

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

AnneJGP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AnneJGP said:
Why 'Madame' President and not 'Madam' President?

Good morning, everyone.
The Brits and Yanks, a common people only separated by language
Oh, OK, I wasn't aware that was one of our differences. Do they pronounce it the French way or say it like we do & simply spell it differently?

It isn't - just shows there are misinformed both sides of the pond.....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madam

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
According to that it would be Madam President, then. But I can't help but think that what Clinton (if elected) says will go.

She's selling buttons saying 'Madam'.....I suspect 'Madame' might sound pretentious to some ears.....

Jobabob · November 2016

MonikerDiCanio said:

Anorak said:
That poll gives trump a 7% lead, assuming 50:50 gender split. Odd, no?
It's a poll of people capable of maintaining domestic relationships. Hillary probably does quite well with the.emotionally incompetent.

You really are a nasty piece of work.

MarqueeMark · November 2016

I think the extra "e" on Madame is so that nobody thinks the FBI have accused her of running a brothel too.....

MaxPB · November 2016

MarqueeMark said:
I think the extra "e" on Madame is so that nobody thinks the FBI have accused her of running a brothel too.....

Jobabob · November 2016

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame

Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.

nunu · November 2016

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.

Well when he doesn't pay a dishwasher what do you expect.........

Jobabob · November 2016

nunu said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.
Well when he doesn't pay a dishwasher what do you expect.........

Well quite.

DavidL · November 2016

Tim Bernard Lee on R4 this morning re internet security and investigatory powers: "Governments always trust themselves just a little bit more than we should trust them."

The man truly is a national treasure.

Lucian_Fletcher · November 2016

George Ford's England career will be over if he joins Toulon. Can we have a whip round for the flight?

SimonStClare · November 2016

https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.

JackW · November 2016

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.

In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?

peter_from_putney · November 2016

***** Betting Post *****

Anyone fancy a safety first combination bet, hopefully to return a 64% profit in 8 days time?
Back the Democrats to win:

330 - 359 ECVs staking 38.74% at 4.40 (4.23 net) with BetfairEx
300 - 329 ECVs staking 37.85% at 4.33 with SkyBet
270 - 299 ECVs staking 23.41% at 7.0 with SyBet

Do your own research.

weejonnie · November 2016

MikeSmithson said:

MonikerDiCanio said:
The numbers suggest the Hillary's popularity with women is a figament of the male imagination. Reassuringly, women hate her as well.
So you support Mr Putin's puppy?

The only person with proven links to Russia is Mr Podesta who made a nice packet out of Uranium sales to Russia. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/20/wikileaks-bombshell-john-podestas-daughter-received-75000-shares-putin-connected-energy-company/

TheWhiteRabbit · November 2016

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?

That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.

weejonnie · November 2016

SimonStClare said:
https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.

It's the independents that are important - I do note that the LA Poll Tracker now has Trump +3.6 - even the change in the vote of the single AA won't account for that.

edmundintokyo · November 2016

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.

When your tanks take the form of TV ads it's quite hard to do a surprise attack without the other side noticing.

Chris · November 2016

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?

Nate Silver looked at this a couple of days ago, and suggested a scenario in which Trump could just reach 270 by winning Wisconsin and Michigan, even without North Carolina and Nevada:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-what-if-clinton-wins-north-carolina-and-loses-pennsylvania/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

Dromedary · November 2016

Is the "e" on the end of "Madam" meant to remind the first gentleman (someone FGOTUS?) that he doesn't have to call Monica if he wants French?

JackW · November 2016

The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :

Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard

DavidL · November 2016

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?

It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.

He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.

JackW · November 2016

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.

And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...

GarethoftheVale2 · November 2016

It is interesting that the massive poll leads for the Cons have become almost unremarkable. I was looking at UK electoral maps since 1997 and the change has been dramatic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1997#/media/File:UK_General_Election,_1997.svg

In 1997, Labour had a massive block of seats stretching all the way across the country from Conwy to Cleethorpes and down to Corby. Another block stretched from Fishguard to Stroud. there was also a big Thames Estuary cluster and another around Northampton and Milton Keynes. Of course Scotland was still strongly Lab and there were some surprise seats like NW Norfolk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005#/media/File:2005UKElectionMap.svg

By 2005 the Northants block has mostly disappeared and Lab has lost ground in the Thames Estuary. Most of the surprise seats like NW Norfolk and Inverness have gone but Lab still looks very strong in the Northern block

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015#/media/File:2015UKElectionMap.svg

By 2015, the biggest change is the disappearance of all but one seat in Scotland. The Tories have broken up the big Northern block by gaining Calder and Colne Valleys. The Thames Estuary cluster has disappeared and Lab are reduced to a few red spots in Southern England outside London.

On current polling and current boundaries Lab could be wiped out in N Wales (losing 4 to Con and 1 to Plaid) and lose 2 each in Coventry and the Potteries. With a small further swing the Cons could become the largest party in Wales and the largest party in the former West Midlands county. The only good news for Lab is that Merseyside, Greater Manchester and S Yorkshire still look rock solid, while Lab would still be largest party in London.

JackW · November 2016

Chris said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
Nate Silver looked at this a couple of days ago, and suggested a scenario in which Trump could just reach 270 by winning Wisconsin and Michigan, even without North Carolina and Nevada:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-what-if-clinton-wins-north-carolina-and-loses-pennsylvania/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

Again in theory yes but it ain't happening.

weejonnie · November 2016

JackW said:
The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :

Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard

Doesn't tell us much that we don't already know.

i.e. Trump won't win unless he picks off the toss-ups and at least two (probably 3) of the lean D states.

JackW · November 2016

DavidL said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.

He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.

Indeed.

Colorado and Nevada are being closed down. Clinton's early scores are encouraging. She's swinging through there in the next few days and has a visit to Arizona being planned too.

edmundintokyo · November 2016

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.

TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.

peter_from_putney · November 2016

weejonnie said:

JackW said:
The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :

Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard
Doesn't tell us much that we don't already know.

True enough, but it certainly highlights the attraction of the "safety first" bet I suggested on this thread.

Jobabob · November 2016

JackW said:
The "Cook Political Report" EC Projection & Map :

Clinton 293 .. Trump 185 .. Toss-Up 60

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard

*Checks betting slip*

david_herdson · November 2016

JackW said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.
And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...

They won the campaign. They lost the rematch four years later.

JackW · November 2016

National Tracker - IBD/TIPP - Sample 1,018 - 26-31 Oct

Clinton 45 .. Trump 44

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

Dromedary · November 2016

DavidL said:
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.

He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.

That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.

JackW · November 2016

david_herdson said:

JackW said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JackW said:

FF43 said:

JackW said:

peter_from_putney said:
It seems to me very likely that whoever wins both Florida & Ohio will be the next POTUS. Perhaps that's an over-simplification, but it's the way I see it.
FOP DENIER !!!!!!!!!

There is no viable route for Trump without all elements of FOP ..
Not QUITE the case. Trump can win if he overturns two states with similar Clinton margins to those those she has with Pennsylvania. The point is, he needs to do 5% better than his current average position in the polls, then a whole bunch of states will fall to him.
In theory possibly .... but not in practice. Which two viable states make up for a Trump Pennsylvania loss?
That would be like the Nazis invading via the Ardennes, thus avoiding the area where the other side had put most of their resources. It would never happen.
And the Nazis lost that campaign too ...
They won the campaign. They lost the rematch four years later.

Clinton beats Trump in 2020 ...

PlatoSaid · November 2016

Bill Mitchell
IBD ridiculous reweight: Party identification breakdown:(Unweighted) 323 Democrats/354 Republicans/327 Independents; (Weighted) 400/329/273

TheWhiteRabbit · November 2016

PlatoSaid said:
Bill Mitchell
IBD ridiculous reweight: Party identification breakdown:(Unweighted) 323 Democrats/354 Republicans/327 Independents; (Weighted) 400/329/273

You can't tell if that's appropriate just from the figures.

Shouldn't be difficult to get the national numbers of party ID?

619 · November 2016

https://twitter.com/matthaig1/status/793282113114034176

PlatoSaid · November 2016

Oh so tragic for those desperate to make a Trump Russia link

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?_r=0

Jobabob · November 2016

Dromedary said:

DavidL said:
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.

He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.
That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.

I think that's more a treatise on what you hope against hope will happen, rather than what is actually likely to happen.

weejonnie · November 2016

619 said:
https://twitter.com/matthaig1/status/793282113114034176

Since Clinton has a proven record for embroiling the USA in wars I think this is hypocritical of her - but she's a Democrat so that's not unexpected.

Jobabob · November 2016

weejonnie said:

SimonStClare said:
https://twitter.com/johnnyvalues01/status/793402003825299456
Partisan split alive and kicking in the US of A.
It's the independents that are important - I do note that the LA Poll Tracker now has Trump +3.6 - even the change in the vote of the single AA won't account for that.

Yes, that's the highest Trump score since, um, 3 October. It really is shit or bust for the LA Times tracker...

PlatoSaid · November 2016

Umm

Ben
Micheal Heseltine choked his Mum's dog to death.
https://t.co/iesOmerMQA https://t.co/yK5muUmuWw

david_herdson · November 2016

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.

'Madam' is what this website, which appears to be an authority on these things, goes with:

http://www.formsofaddress.info/FOA_president_US.html

JackW · November 2016

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,128 - 26-30 Oct

Clinton 45 .. Trump 46

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-leads-clinton-point-poll-enthusiasm-declines/story?id=43199459

Theuniondivvie · November 2016

edmundintokyo said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.
TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.

Yep, it's a complete slur to suggest that Trump isn't just as likely to bilk a service provider who had done a good job for him.

Nigelb · November 2016

edmundintokyo said:

Jobabob said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

CarlottaVance said:

not_on_fire said:
Surely it will be Mrs President not Madame President? Male presidents are called Mr President, not Sir President
No. 'Madam'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._President_(title)
According to some random person who wrote in to the Guardian.

Right...
According to American English dictionaries....'Madame' refers to a married French lady...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/madame
Indeed. The mug is plain wrong.

P.S. Check out Carlotta's early post this morning about Trump failing to pay his pollster – he owes this guy about $700k or something. Doesn't like the results he has been getting, won't pay. Required reading.
TBF the "doesn't like the results he's been getting" angle is pure speculation.

The preferred explanation is that he's a deadbeat billionaire.

Sandpit · November 2016

Morning all. Random US question, does anyone know of any markets that are actually for the name of the next president, i.e. to be settled on Inauguration Day rather than just after the election?

I have a feeling that a lot might happen between November and January, and the next president isn't who we think it will be.

logical_song · November 2016

"According to exit polls, 53 percent of voters in the 2012 elections were women"
https://voterunlead.org/go-vote/womens-vote/

Dromedary · November 2016

Jobabob said:

Dromedary said:

DavidL said:
It would have to be Colorado and Nevada with the latter looking vanishingly unlikely. And he would need FL, Az, NC, Iowa, and Ohio as well of course.

He still needs a swing of at least 3-4% to be in the game. Looks unlikely.
That kind of swing looks unlikely in your crystal ball. Mine predicts another big surprise that damages Clinton in the days that remain. It could be related to Weiner or Abedin. Abedin is a Muslim, not like Obama but in reality: that isn't going to play well. Weiner had absolutely no idea about computer security, his and Abedin's computers were linked, and I shudder to think what a state-backed hacker may have inserted.
I think that's more a treatise on what you hope against hope will happen, rather than what is actually likely to happen.

No - I want Clinton to win! But I think the momentum is with Trump and that the Clinton side's responses to the Comey story have been punily weak.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clinton versus Trump: What men say their spouses will do and w

Comments