politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Based on current Betfair WH2016 odds why Nate Silver thinks Be
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Based on current Betfair WH2016 odds why Nate Silver thinks Beto O’Rourke is the most likely Democratic VP pick
This is from a discussion on Nate’s site – Fivethirtyeight on Beto O’Rourke’s chances of becoming his party’s Vice Presidential nominee. This is, of course, chosen by the nominee for President and takes place just before the convention. He notes.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
FPT: She looks like a character from "Guess Who?"
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1095803128123920385
He'll change position when he'd damn well ready, not before, and they don't have the balls to do more than whinge before he does.
But next time they totally won't stand for it you guys, for realsies.
Tony Blair
Gordon Brown
Jeremy Corbyn
Paddy Ashdown
Michael Howard
If unelectable means can't possibly win an election then clearly that doesn't apply to Corbyn.
If electable means good looking opinion polls then we should go back to the heydays of Ed Miliband, I'd rather have a shot at winning the next election instead, which is my prefered definition of electable.
Betfair has an exit date of last quarter 2020 as 28, so worth a punt in my analysis.
https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1095607178952617984?s=21
28 well worth a nibble IMO.
If the EU agree to this it's not because they're admitting they're wrong, it's because they can sense the mess and weakness on our side and can see how giving this allows them even more time to take advantage of our confusion and the uncertainty for companies while avoiding the disadvantages for them of a No Deal exit.
I can see it getting EU and Labour support.
I think you are being kind.
In living memory?
Maybe Foot's campaign is a close runner up?
Sure Jezza lost, but he is just a few seats away from bringing down the Tories. 2 years ago the talk was of a 3 figure Tory majority.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/churchill-was-a-racist-but-still-a-great-man-vnhkhfnpm
Corbyn is clearly not this, he may well never win an election, plenty of politicians don't that doesn't mean they are all unelectable. Otherwise every politician who has never won an election is unelectable which makes any swap in Labour (aside from Tony Blair coming back) pointless on that basis alone.
It wasn't impressive just because he did it whilst under attack from his own party and receiving some of the worst press possible for almost his entire time as leader.
It was an objectively impressive performance even disregarding all that, considering the Conservatives had Brexit which won them huge amounts of votes as well, Labour did brilliantly to not only keep up with the Conservatives but actually begin to catch up with them. The path to a Labour victory thanks to Corbyn's performance in GE'17 is a hell of a lot easier and actually realistically possible.
I was hoping this was just Piers Morgan being Piers Morgan...
Its healthy to acknowledge the good and the bad, the good doesn't erase the bad and the bad doesn't erase the good.
Also if we can't accept criticism of leaders who did some good for Britain but also did very bad things then we cannot really look down on other countries who glorify leaders from their past similarly. Grey areas everywhere.
In an interview with the Times, Shamima Begum, now 19, talked about seeing "beheaded heads" in bins - but said that it "did not faze her".
Speaking from a camp in Syria, she said she was nine months pregnant and wanted to come home for the sake of her baby.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47229181
Equivalent of the NHS not so good in the Caliphate?
Its blind patriotism to pretend Churchill was a perfect angel who never did anything wrong, we don't look up to important figures in other countries and discount their crimes simply because they were important and did some good things.
I don't accept the argument that Stalin was a good guy or his crimes were somehow lessened because he played a huge role in defeating Hitler. Defeating Hitler was a great thing but it doesn't erase his crimes.
And before any snowflakes melt that was not me saying Churchill is the same as Stalin.
Considering the new Hitler youth movement the Tories have got going I thought they would be on board with the idea of Churchill as a bad guy anyway.
I simply stated that among a section of the hard left there is a movement to brand Churchill in a particular way. You kinda of making my case for me.
TBH if people genuinely believe Churchill never did anything wrong they are ignorant of history, if they think he did nothing right then similarly.
I don't care where you are on the political spectrum if you can't see beyond people being great or terrible that is just stupid and makes conversation impossible. Everyone, even quite good people are flawed, the idea that Churchill did not do some bad things and have some bad views is just ahistorical.
Again, you are projecting what you think my opinions are, when I haven't said anything other than what is true about a section of the left that has a very low opinion of Churchill, much of which I see parroted based on historical inaccuracies. Even Johnny Mac latest claim is based on an incident where it is extremely disputed that what he is saying is the based on the actual facts.
I called you Piers because you were very sensitive about the idea.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd79Ie_vWyQ
https://www.bbc.com/news/education-47227157
Its a bit hard to get into the best unis if your A-Level grades are crap. Its not the unis fault if applicants from particular demographics have far worse attainment. Its starts much lower down.
US District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that Manafort "made multiple false statements" to the FBI, Mr Mueller's office and a grand jury.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47234491
If you weren't sensitive to the idea that Churchill was not an angel you probably wouldn't have bothered.
Much like Piers Morgan.
Universities set admission policy, they don't have to do so exclusively on the basis of "A" levels which are easy to game for rich people. There are other ways to identify talented candidates.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/13/schumer-beto-castro-2020-senate-bid-1168554
I’m not convinced O’Rourke would be a comfortable VP pick for the candidates Nate Silver hypothesises might pick him.
Whereas running for the Senate again in a presidential year would suit everyone; both O’Rourke and the Democrats would benefit.
Telling the full truth might hasten Trump’s impeachment, and would in any event destroy his hopes of a pardon from the Grifter in Chief.
However, I have long advocated on here, the best single change that could be made to assist those from poorer backgrounds / worse schools, post A-Level result applications.
Then applications would be based on actual results, not gamed predictions, and the universities could see the standing on a candidate in relation to peers (and if they choose make some consideration for other factors).