politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest powerful ad from the Republican organisation that i
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest powerful ad from the Republican organisation that is trying to stop Trump
One of the really interesting features of the White House election that takes place four months from today is the series of ads from the Lincoln Project – a Republican body that is seeking to do everything it can to undermine the Republican incumbent, Donald Trump.
0
Comments
-
First And very pleased to see that the PB editorials are starting to go with the non-publication of the story about Russian involvement with our elections. I would like to see other responsible journalists run with this too.0
-
I think it's a great ad.
As mentioned on a previous thread, it might be too clever for some of the target audience...0 -
Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.0
-
Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.0
-
Fifth, as in amendment0
-
It's fun but does it work?rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
There was an interesting article republished here from RCP earlier indicating that Trump's real soft spot was any linkage between his character and real policy disasters, notably C-19.0 -
Yeah right. There's always a reason not to raise specific taxes even when in favour in theory.HYUFD said:
Thing is he has now, by getting more visibly angry, which makes it more of a tirade than full of gags wwhich he pauses over. Which is a shame, given how funny I think he is (and not that it was ever non-partisan, though my favourite episodes are the more institutional focused issues).Quincel said:
I do like Last Week Tonight, but it is clear John Oliver should update his delivery for the lack of a studio audience!Stuartinromford said:
One America Network. Cable News for those who think Fox is just too left-wing.Peter_the_Punter said:
ONA? Sorry but that's a TLA I don't recognise.Quincel said:
Not sure, but I'm ignoring them until they get corroboration due to them being so out of line with everything else and being paid for by OAN which combined with their numbers makes me suspicious of their methodology.Peter_the_Punter said:
Why is everyone ignoring the Gravis polls for Arizona?eristdoof said:
It is only one state poll I know, but Texas should not be anywhere near turning Dem. I remember in 2008 McCain was forced to start campaigning in the "leaning republican" states to prevent them from going Blue diverting considerable resources away from the battleground states.Scott_xP said:
If Trump is going to have to fight to just keep Texas, he's going to have huge problems where it really matters in Pa and Fl
Covered earlier?
Well, not quite ignoring. But significantly downrating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnSILVWDKL8
0 -
I think it works because it IS fun. It will get lots of retweets and views. It doesn't matter if you can't keep up with the words and images. It is the overall feel of the ad that matters. The message is very clear.Peter_the_Punter said:
It's fun but does it work?rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
There was an interesting article republished here from RCP earlier indicating that Trump's real soft spot was any linkage between his character and real policy disasters, notably C-19.0 -
-
What an odd tweet - his divisive messaging has always been his clear message, you can hardly separate them.Scott_xP said:1 -
They may as well urge a fish to get out of the water and breathe. It's been clear for a while that while Trump's strategy in 2016 was basically correct that wasn't by design as much as his only gear being the suitable one for the race. If he was going to change course he'd have done so ages ago, even the midterms didn't do anything to change that.Scott_xP said:1 -
I mean 'work' in the sense of winning voters over, not merely in making people like us chortle.Barnesian said:
I think it works because it IS fun. It will get lots of retweets and views. It doesn't matter if you can't keep up with the words and images. It is the overall feel of the ad that matters. The message is very clear.Peter_the_Punter said:
It's fun but does it work?rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
There was an interesting article republished here from RCP earlier indicating that Trump's real soft spot was any linkage between his character and real policy disasters, notably C-19.0 -
The only people I see posting stuff from the Lincoln Project are those who would never have voted Republican, let alone for Trump.
It's #FBPE all over again, tweeting stuff to make themselves feel good but has zero impact on the outside world.1 -
Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=201 -
The big issue for the US is that while Asia, Australasia and Europe are now managing the virus and re-opening, the US is facing a de facto (rather than de jure) second lockdown.Quincel said:Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.
People won't go out if they don't feel safe. And if they don't go out, then you get all the economic consequences of a lockdown without any of the actual benefits of wiping out the virus. (Which is why Sweden has performed less well economically than neighbours Denmark and Germany, and even - astonishingly - France.)
This is what the US faces. People won't go out because they're scared. They will sit at home and not spend their money and not send their kids to school. And the level of infections will remain stubbornly high.0 -
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=202 -
I suspect that's "tax rises on other people"HYUFD said:
A more honest way of asking the question would be to ask:
"Would you prefer to pay more tax yourself or receive lower levels of service (NHS, Social Care, Pensions) yourself?
That might not produce the same answer.5 -
-
The BBC staff shouldn't be wearing the badges even if it wasn't hijacked by marxists. It is still 'political'.Andy_JS said:
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=208 -
Bannon was telling him what the campaign vision was. Without him Trump hasn't a clue.Quincel said:
They may as well urge a fish to get out of the water and breathe. It's been clear for a while that while Trump's strategy in 2016 was basically correct that wasn't by design as much as his only gear being the suitable one for the race. If he was going to change course he'd have done so ages ago, even the midterms didn't do anything to change that.Scott_xP said:0 -
I agree - but it's preaching to the choir.Peter_the_Punter said:
I mean 'work' in the sense of winning voters over, not merely in making people like us chortle.Barnesian said:
I think it works because it IS fun. It will get lots of retweets and views. It doesn't matter if you can't keep up with the words and images. It is the overall feel of the ad that matters. The message is very clear.Peter_the_Punter said:
It's fun but does it work?rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
There was an interesting article republished here from RCP earlier indicating that Trump's real soft spot was any linkage between his character and real policy disasters, notably C-19.0 -
It's not bad, and most voters will remember the Russian links to the last election. Tbh I find a lot of the Lincoln adverts underwhelming but this one is OK.rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
0 -
Which is why everyone’s unquestioned support for it makes no sense.Andy_JS said:
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=20
What happened to football’s perfectly serviceable “Kick It Out” anti-racism campaign? That would have been a much better brand to have used.3 -
There are so many things to get Trump on from the right, his complete disregard for the national finances for one.rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
0 -
Are there still people FBPE-ing I wonder.brokenwheel said:The only people I see posting stuff from the Lincoln Project are those who would never have voted Republican, let alone for Trump.
It's #FBPE all over again, tweeting stuff to make themselves feel good but has zero impact on the outside world.0 -
Oh there are.kle4 said:
Are there still people FBPE-ing I wonder.brokenwheel said:The only people I see posting stuff from the Lincoln Project are those who would never have voted Republican, let alone for Trump.
It's #FBPE all over again, tweeting stuff to make themselves feel good but has zero impact on the outside world.1 -
1
-
People seemed to think it was just a phraserottenborough said:
The BBC staff shouldn't be wearing the badges even if it wasn't hijacked by marxists. It is still 'political'.Andy_JS said:
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=200 -
Maybe. It might depend on how good the data is. Half of America lives in small towns miles from anywhere that might easily escape the virus, at least for a time. The point is to let them know where it is safe.rcs1000 said:
The big issue for the US is that while Asia, Australasia and Europe are now managing the virus and re-opening, the US is facing a de facto (rather than de jure) second lockdown.Quincel said:Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.
People won't go out if they don't feel safe. And if they don't go out, then you get all the economic consequences of a lockdown without any of the actual benefits of wiping out the virus. (Which is why Sweden has performed less well economically than neighbours Denmark and Germany, and even - astonishingly - France.)
This is what the US faces. People won't go out because they're scared. They will sit at home and not spend their money and not send their kids to school. And the level of infections will remain stubbornly high.0 -
I think the worst part of the Russian constitution story is that clearly Putin is just getting lazier. I mean, standing down as president for four years before you could be president again was at least mildly creative, but now he's just going the traditional 'new constitution means term limits reset to zero' approach.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-532559640 -
Thankfully we have a more rational, evidence based policy in this country. Like opening all the shops on 29th June but only requiring people to wear masks in them from 10th July.
My better half has been helping her mother to the shops today. They were absolutely mobbed. Not even 1 in 10 is wearing a mask. In fact, from my own observations, I would say that mask use is down from a month ago.
You can make arguments in favour of or against masks but Scotland's current position is nothing short of nuts.0 -
-
Should have just removed the limit entirely.kle4 said:I think the worst part of the Russian constitution story is that clearly Putin is just getting lazier. I mean, standing down as president for four years before you could be president again was at least mildly creative, but now he's just going the traditional 'new constitution means term limits reset to zero' approach.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-532559640 -
That's a shame. I didn't think he had denigrated the significance of the moment at all, he was just saying he did not agree with all the aims of a political organisation around the moment.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Reagan proved deficits don't matter. Or rather, not until there's a Democrat in the White House.MaxPB said:
There are so many things to get Trump on from the right, his complete disregard for the national finances for one.rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
0 -
Yes, when people are in favour of tax rises it probably means on those a bit better off than themselves.CarlottaVance said:
I suspect that's "tax rises on other people"HYUFD said:
A more honest way of asking the question would be to ask:
"Would you prefer to pay more tax yourself or receive lower levels of service (NHS, Social Care, Pensions) yourself?
That might not produce the same answer.0 -
Go full Ceasar on it? Nah, he still has some standards, as strongmen go.RobD said:
Should have just removed the limit entirely.kle4 said:I think the worst part of the Russian constitution story is that clearly Putin is just getting lazier. I mean, standing down as president for four years before you could be president again was at least mildly creative, but now he's just going the traditional 'new constitution means term limits reset to zero' approach.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53255964
Brave of the one region strongly against it though
0 -
There was speculation that Vova was going to ramp up moribund Union State of Russia and Belarus and become Prez of that, but I guess as Lukashenko has been going rather off-the-leash recently he decided not to.kle4 said:
Go full Ceasar on it? Nah, he still has some standards, as strongmen go.RobD said:
Should have just removed the limit entirely.kle4 said:I think the worst part of the Russian constitution story is that clearly Putin is just getting lazier. I mean, standing down as president for four years before you could be president again was at least mildly creative, but now he's just going the traditional 'new constitution means term limits reset to zero' approach.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53255964
Brave of the one region strongly against it though0 -
Hmm, perhaps it also channels early Soviet design just a bit - Constructivists such as Rodchenko?Barnesian said:
I think it works because it IS fun. It will get lots of retweets and views. It doesn't matter if you can't keep up with the words and images. It is the overall feel of the ad that matters. The message is very clear.Peter_the_Punter said:
It's fun but does it work?rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
There was an interesting article republished here from RCP earlier indicating that Trump's real soft spot was any linkage between his character and real policy disasters, notably C-19.
0 -
Owen keeping him honest.isam said:0 -
isam said:
An S-turn
0 -
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.0 -
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.0 -
I think it's the curse of "the power of positive thinking". Trump chose to disregard what happened in Minnesota, Arizona and Wisconsin, and instead looked at the results in Florida and said "Wow, look at that Florida result. If I can win in Florida at the midterms, I must be doing great."Quincel said:
They may as well urge a fish to get out of the water and breathe. It's been clear for a while that while Trump's strategy in 2016 was basically correct that wasn't by design as much as his only gear being the suitable one for the race. If he was going to change course he'd have done so ages ago, even the midterms didn't do anything to change that.Scott_xP said:0 -
kle4 said:
Brave of the one region strongly against it though.RobD said:
Should have just removed the limit entirely.kle4 said:I think the worst part of the Russian constitution story is that clearly Putin is just getting lazier. I mean, standing down as president for four years before you could be president again was at least mildly creative, but now he's just going the traditional 'new constitution means term limits reset to zero' approach.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53255964
That probably isn't directly related to Putin though. There were local plans to merge the Okrug into its neighbours which did not go down very well with the populace at all.0 -
It's just a bit meh. More to the point, I'm not sure whom it's really targeting. I guess it is the more educated, suburban Republican who has a grasp of foreign affairs and is interested in the outside world. The thing is, though, if you are one of those people, you know that Putin isn't a Communist so it just feels a bit forced. Also, he's been President for four years and it is hard to point to something major where you would say "yup, he's in Putin pocket". The Syrian stuff is too convoluted and he hasn't let Putin take over the Baltics or Ukraine so where exactly is the evidence he is soft on Russia vs, eg, Obama?DecrepiterJohnL said:
It's not bad, and most voters will remember the Russian links to the last election. Tbh I find a lot of the Lincoln adverts underwhelming but this one is OK.rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
0 -
I suspect it's more about getting people into the habit of wearing them in preparation for the second wave. Yes, it would have been sensible to have insisted on masks from the start, as happened elsewhere.DavidL said:Thankfully we have a more rational, evidence based policy in this country. Like opening all the shops on 29th June but only requiring people to wear masks in them from 10th July.
My better half has been helping her mother to the shops today. They were absolutely mobbed. Not even 1 in 10 is wearing a mask. In fact, from my own observations, I would say that mask use is down from a month ago.
You can make arguments in favour of or against masks but Scotland's current position is nothing short of nuts.0 -
More like a U-bend...isam said:1 -
kinabalu said:
Owen keeping him honest.isam said:
Ooh, first steps towards a paywall from The Guardian!IanB2 said:isam said:
An S-turn0 -
One has to conclude that if the report said that the referendum was squeeky clean and no Russian interference Cummings would have ensured it was all over the papers. One also has to wonder whether it references Mr Cumming's Russian connections.ClippP said:First And very pleased to see that the PB editorials are starting to go with the non-publication of the story about Russian involvement with our elections. I would like to see other responsible journalists run with this too.
The reality is that you would have to be very gullible indeed to not think he attempted to pervert the result. I would imagine he would consider it a great success.
52% of the British population are Putin's useful idiots. And they try to make out they are patriots!2 -
Tacking centrewards - or tbh just appearing to not relish division for division's sake - is what imo Trump needs to do to have a realistic chance of reelection. But my sense of the man is that he simply cannot do it.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.0 -
Haha yesBluestBlue said:
More like a U-bend...isam said:0 -
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.0 -
Lib Dem SURGE! Maybe another passenger in the second taxi?Andy_JS said:0 -
Well, not all of us. I (and many folk I know) would rather pay more tax - both income tax and council tax - for better national and local services. The quality of my life would improve considerably with improved services, shorter waiting times for medical needs, cleaner streets, better transport and so on. Much more important to me than a bit of extra money in my pocket to spend on consumer tat.Andy_JS said:
Yes, when people are in favour of tax rises it probably means on those a bit better off than themselves.CarlottaVance said:
I suspect that's "tax rises on other people"HYUFD said:
A more honest way of asking the question would be to ask:
"Would you prefer to pay more tax yourself or receive lower levels of service (NHS, Social Care, Pensions) yourself?
That might not produce the same answer.1 -
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.1 -
THe tweet before that is worth seeing tooCarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/HumzaYousaf/status/12786557275492556800 -
Looking at the latest figures for new C-19 cases, it ain't about to get better any time soon.contrarian said:
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.
The pandemic is begining to look completely out of control in the USA. States that were previously little affected are starting to record worrying numbers.0 -
It was a good slogan for an extreme left organisation.Andy_JS said:
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=202 -
No cigar, but full Marx for effort.Sean_F said:
It was a good slogan for an extreme left organisation.Andy_JS said:
It hasn't been hijacked, their agenda was clear from the start.isam said:Sir Keir, Sky Sports, the Premier League, and now the BBC realise they were duped
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1278655030426578944?s=200 -
rcs1000 said:
The big issue for the US is that while Asia, Australasia and Europe are now managing the virus and re-opening, the US is facing a de facto (rather than de jure) second lockdown.Quincel said:Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.
People won't go out if they don't feel safe. And if they don't go out, then you get all the economic consequences of a lockdown without any of the actual benefits of wiping out the virus. (Which is why Sweden has performed less well economically than neighbours Denmark and Germany, and even - astonishingly - France.)
This is what the US faces. People won't go out because they're scared. They will sit at home and not spend their money and not send their kids to school. And the level of infections will remain stubbornly high.
Is there any sort of consensus in the US as to why the death rate seems so much lower than other countries?0 -
The outing of a former President as predatory, might be helpful to Trump's reelection hopes.CarlottaVance said:0 -
brokenwheel said:
The only people I see posting stuff from the Lincoln Project are those who would never have voted Republican, let alone for Trump.
It's #FBPE all over again, tweeting stuff to make themselves feel good but has zero impact on the outside world.
It doesn't matter who's posting it here, what matters is who is seeing it when it airs in the US.
0 -
US corona figures are awful, and in turn, global recovery prospects.
What an awful year 2020 is.
Perhaps though, Trump’s defeat is the cathartic moment we all need.2 -
Maybe he watched Boris in 2019?contrarian said:
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.0 -
I think there is truth in that but his problem he has is that there aren't nearly enough core voters. At the moment he only has the core so unless he can get back some of the moderates and independents he had in 2016 then he's out.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.0 -
We could see some dramatic changes to the global GDP rankings based on the differential impact of coronavirus.0
-
A 4% gap in each of the last two polls. In historic terms, that's nothing to shout about for the Conservatives only 6 months in, especially after such an emphatic win. Winning parties generally have a honeymoon effect that at least maintains their lead early on in a parliament and only starts to wear off later, the 2017 GE being the exception only because May blew a majority and as such was perceived to have "lost".Andy_JS said:
Did anyone take that bet that there would be a poll with the Tories behind before the end of 2020?1 -
MrEd said:
It's just a bit meh. More to the point, I'm not sure whom it's really targeting. I guess it is the more educated, suburban Republican who has a grasp of foreign affairs and is interested in the outside world. The thing is, though, if you are one of those people, you know that Putin isn't a Communist so it just feels a bit forced. Also, he's been President for four years and it is hard to point to something major where you would say "yup, he's in Putin pocket". The Syrian stuff is too convoluted and he hasn't let Putin take over the Baltics or Ukraine so where exactly is the evidence he is soft on Russia vs, eg, Obama?DecrepiterJohnL said:
It's not bad, and most voters will remember the Russian links to the last election. Tbh I find a lot of the Lincoln adverts underwhelming but this one is OK.rcs1000 said:Personally, I don't like the ad. It's too busy, and you need to be able to read really quick. And Putin isn't Communist. And there's no real "evidence" in there.
The Lincoln Project aren't after Trump's core voters they after the younger, college educated urban and suburban Republican that gave him the benefit of the doubt in 2016.2 -
Worked for Johnsoncontrarian said:
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.1 -
Unlike OGH and some other posters, I don't rate this particular Lincoln Project ad highly - it is too much the Manchurian candidate to be truly powerful.
What is effective are their ads showing traditional Republican voters not just disgusted with Trump's morality and personality, but with how those directly and adversely impact on US interests and policies in ways that tangibly impact those traditional GOP voters - how Trump's character is leading to more COVID deaths, more and longer job losses, worse markets for farmers, and more US troop deaths overseas.
Just attacking Trump's benefiting from Russian dirty tricks and saying he's in Putin's pocket is far less effective, IMO.5 -
Not if she names Trump it won't be.Mexicanpete said:
The outing of a former President as predatory, might be helpful to Trump's reelection hopes.CarlottaVance said:1 -
Thanks, I did something or the other that allowed me to read itIanB2 said:
Well I thought that Sir Keir may lose vote to the Greens if he strayed to far from Corbynism, and OJ seems to be threatening that. We are not in cahoots!
He has obviously tied himself in all kinds of knots with his taking of the knee, I cant imagine it was his idea. A photo op that went wrong. Corbyn, on the other hand, was in Archway yesterday and tweeting later in no uncertain terms that he is fully with the BLM moment/movement. Sir Keir should leave all that to him, maybe form a kind of pincer movement a la Vote Leave and Leave.EU in order to straddle both elements of the left wing vote @TOPPING ?0 -
The kids are getting it from bars and protests, and don’t care when the alternative is being locked down.OllyT said:
Is there any sort of consensus in the US as to why the death rate seems so much lower than other countries?rcs1000 said:
The big issue for the US is that while Asia, Australasia and Europe are now managing the virus and re-opening, the US is facing a de facto (rather than de jure) second lockdown.Quincel said:Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.
People won't go out if they don't feel safe. And if they don't go out, then you get all the economic consequences of a lockdown without any of the actual benefits of wiping out the virus. (Which is why Sweden has performed less well economically than neighbours Denmark and Germany, and even - astonishingly - France.)
This is what the US faces. People won't go out because they're scared. They will sit at home and not spend their money and not send their kids to school. And the level of infections will remain stubbornly high.0 -
CNN: FBI New York Assistant Director in Charge William Sweeney said that bureau officials "have been discreetly keeping tabs" on Maxwell who had "slithered away to a gorgeous property" in New Hampshire.
"We learned she had slithered away to a gorgeous property in New Hampshire, continuing to live a live a life of privilege while her victims continue to live with the trauma inflicted upon them years ago. We moved when we were ready and Ms. Maxwell was arrested without incident,” he said.
Sweeney said that the FBI, along with the NYPD, arrested Maxwell in Bradford, New Hampshire, this morning without incident.0 -
That has to be the funniest VAR yet. Spurs didn't even get a free-kick!0
-
Yup, reminds me of a European Cup match featuring Dirty Leeds when a Leeds player was kicked into an offside position.tlg86 said:That has to be the funniest VAR yet. Spurs didn't even get a free-kick!
1 -
1
-
On topic, I don't think these will hurt Trump that much, what will hurt him is Facebook being castrated and having to pull his content.0
-
At least that one was given...TheScreamingEagles said:Still the most famous handball featuring a Spurs player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3IcR6J6rtM
https://twitter.com/TheAnfieldWrap/status/9057360405640519680 -
Poor Stephane Henchoz, he put in the best goalkeeping performance in an FA Cup final since Bert Trautman and he's not honoured.tlg86 said:
At least that one was given...TheScreamingEagles said:Still the most famous handball featuring a Spurs player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3IcR6J6rtM
https://twitter.com/TheAnfieldWrap/status/9057360405640519681 -
It's a once in roughly every 50 years occurrence. The last one was the 1968/69 flu epidemic which was every bit as bad as Covid-19, if not more so.Gardenwalker said:US corona figures are awful, and in turn, global recovery prospects.
What an awful year 2020 is.
Perhaps though, Trump’s defeat is the cathartic moment we all need.0 -
That remains one of the crookedest refereeing performances I've ever seen. It lives in the memory and I'm certainly not a Weeds Punited fan.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yup, reminds me of a European Cup match featuring Dirty Leeds when a Leeds player was kicked into an offside position.tlg86 said:That has to be the funniest VAR yet. Spurs didn't even get a free-kick!
It wasn't just the one decision, although that offside was about as bad as it gets. It was the whole game. Weeds were so superior that the ref had to bend over backwards just to give their opponents a chance and even then they nearly muffed it.0 -
Are the FA doing anything for women’s football? It seems to have been forgoten0
-
Oh. Bit odd. I don't have one. Ah well.isam said:
It was Owen getting on Starmer's case a little bit. Not a lot but enough to make it clear that he and ilk will be no pushover.0 -
Don't you think that's smart?contrarian said:
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.
1. Never interrupt your opponent when he's making a mistake. Biden's advisors have worked out that Trump is tying himself to an expanding CV-19 disaster, so why get your own face out there, and allow yourself to get into an argument with Trump.
2. The less people see of Biden, the more he can be people's idealised "anti-Trump". If they see him, he'll have to answer lots of awkward questions.
5 -
3. Gives the dodgy facelift time to settle.rcs1000 said:
Don't you think that's smart?contrarian said:
Biden is the non-candidate. He's in hiding. its almost kafka-esque. The polls show enormous enthusiasm for a man who isn;t there, who almost doesn;t exist as a political force.rcs1000 said:
Oh, it's too late for Trump to change course.contrarian said:
The core vote see statues coming down and police departments getting defunded. They are scared.rcs1000 said:
It's interesting: most Presidents who lose the House at their first midterms (such as Clinton) tack hard to the centre. Indeed, you might argue that losing the House forces moderation, and therefore increases their likelihood of re-election.Scott_xP said:
That's not Trump's style. And I think it's his greatest weakness. Getting re-elected means you want to try and expand your coalition. And Trump has doubled down on his core vote strategy.
To work it requires that the people he connects with - non-urban whites - come out in record numbers. Can it work? Yes, of course. US Presidential elections are relatively low-turnout, and if you can really enthuse the base you can win.
But it's a pretty high risk strategy. Because you are throwing away some votes (hopefully to DNV) and hoping you collect more, while also avoiding increasing the turnout of those voting explicitly against you.
If Trump tacks to the centre, no way will they turn out for him.
But he's chosen to lose suburban women who preferred his (as it appeared) honest competence to Hillary Clinton.
If he's lucky, suburban women will go to DNV. If he's unlucky, they'll go to Biden. And if they go to Biden, he needs to pick up two new DNVs in his base for ever one he loses. That's a tough call.
My pet theory is the polls partly show unhappiness with life. And Americans have plenty to be unhappy about right now.
1. Never interrupt your opponent when he's making a mistake. Biden's advisors have worked out that Trump is tying himself to an expanding CV-19 disaster, so why get your own face out there, and allow yourself to get into an argument with Trump.
2. The less people see of Biden, the more he can be people's idealised "anti-Trump". If they see him, he'll have to answer lots of awkward questions.0 -
Fans of Nottingham Forest would disagree with you.Peter_the_Punter said:
That remains one of the crookedest refereeing performances I've ever seen. It lives in the memory and I'm certainly not a Weeds Punited fan.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yup, reminds me of a European Cup match featuring Dirty Leeds when a Leeds player was kicked into an offside position.tlg86 said:That has to be the funniest VAR yet. Spurs didn't even get a free-kick!
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/dec/11/nottingham-forest-anderlecht-match-fixing-scandal-19840 -
I read it in the end. Yes I thought that Sir Keir may lose vote to the Greens if he strayed to far from Corbynism, and OJ seems to be threatening that. We are not in cahoots!kinabalu said:
Oh. Bit odd. I don't have one. Ah well.isam said:
It was Owen getting on Starmer's case a little bit. Not a lot but enough to make it clear that he and ilk will be no pushover.
He has obviously tied himself in all kinds of knots with his taking of the knee, I cant imagine it was his idea. A photo op that went wrong. Corbyn, on the other hand, was in Archway yesterday and tweeting later in no uncertain terms that he is fully with the BLM moment/movement. Sir Keir should leave all that to him, maybe form a kind of pincer movement a la Vote Leave and Leave.EU in order to straddle both elements of the left wing vote @TOPPING ?0 -
Death rates are low when health systems are not overloaded.OllyT said:rcs1000 said:
The big issue for the US is that while Asia, Australasia and Europe are now managing the virus and re-opening, the US is facing a de facto (rather than de jure) second lockdown.Quincel said:Biden should be 1/3 to win, I'm just gonna say it. Trump's deficit is huge, views are entrenched, Biden is widely seen as moderate/safe and that will be hard to budge, the pandemic makes it hard for the election to be about the economy as much as Trump wants, and so on.
People won't go out if they don't feel safe. And if they don't go out, then you get all the economic consequences of a lockdown without any of the actual benefits of wiping out the virus. (Which is why Sweden has performed less well economically than neighbours Denmark and Germany, and even - astonishingly - France.)
This is what the US faces. People won't go out because they're scared. They will sit at home and not spend their money and not send their kids to school. And the level of infections will remain stubbornly high.
Is there any sort of consensus in the US as to why the death rate seems so much lower than other countries?
Health systems in the US have not yet, with the exception of NYC two months ago, been overloaded.
If the virus can be contained so it stays within the capacity of health systems, it will probably be largely OK.
If it cannot, and the diminishing number of available IC beds in Houston and Phoenix suggest this is happening now, then you will see the death rate spike again.0
This discussion has been closed.