Categories
Options
Trump now 22% favourite to be the WH2024 Republican nominee – politicalbetting.com
Trump now 22% favourite to be the WH2024 Republican nominee – politicalbetting.com
After his first big speech since leaving the White House Trump has now now moved to be clear favourite on the Smarkets exchange to get the GOP nomination for the WH2024 race.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Oh, and first.
Even if he faced criminal charges his base would likely make him a martyr, the French centre right's problem was it was overtaken on the populist right by Le Pen, that happened well before Sarkozy was convicted (he will spend his sentence tagged at home anyway). Trump has made clear he will not start his own populist party but keep the GOP as his main vehicle
He could get a lot of limelight and more importantly grift a lot out of being the nominee even if he loses. Just think of all those rallies of adoring fans he could get, preferably staying at Trump hotels and Trump golf courses.
Who cares if the Democrats then win the election. Brand Trump gets the cash and ego rubbing he adores.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/1366795973515763713
I hear that Michael Gove prefers Columbian himself.
Its a bit like one of those Bird and Fortune sketches.
Whether by simple decline, illness or worse, he may not be in a position to run for President next time around.
33% chance he is too unwell to run.
50% he chooses to run if fit to do so.
70% he wins the nomination if fit to run.
Works out just under 1/4 chance that he gets the nomination. The odds seem fair to me.
They won't meet any threshold required to win on the list vote so all they are doing is taking list votes away from the unionist parties that might actually win seats on the list.
UKIP got 2% of the list vote in 2016 and zero seat. These aren't even registering with the opinion pollsters and aren't going to get any seats at all. Pure distilled wasted votes.
What percentage of the vote is required to win a list seat? They're not going to get close that figure.
He gets a high from the campaign trail and if its not him then there'll be someone else pulling the crowds and he'll be left behind. There's a reasonable chance his vanity sees him run again - and a reasonable chance the GOP is too weak to resist his siren call.
.33 * .5 *.7 = 11.5% = 9/1
(1-0.33)*.5*.7 = 23.5%
So 0.67*.5*.7 = 23.5% chance.
Though the 0.5 is way too low - I'd put it around 90%.
But then you'd need to include a 10-20% chance of his being a convicted felon.
Seems getting younger by the day
Calling Shaun Bailey a top Tory, ffs guys.
https://twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/1366791205204418566?s=20
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bill-introduced-to-create-high-risk-high-reward-research-agency-aria
I'd like to see more before I criticise, but I'm not sure they've taken on board all the lessons from the US version.
https://twitter.com/StuartKLau/status/1366732975229050887
It's the way you tell 'em...
https://twitter.com/Quicktake/status/1366772401229492230
https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1366723657192640513
https://twitter.com/hhesterm/status/1366774433030033409
Hiroo Onoda over there has a few more years of battle left in him.
Let him stew in the malaria-ridden swamp of his own production.
I think you'll find that Boris is nimbly going from strength to strength while the sclerotic European Union we have left has been exposed to everyone now with their vaccine debacle.
Guess what?
Completely screwed. Because of the paperwork which your party signed up to.
Businesses that took decades to create. Because your party couldn't be bothered to sort out boring details like that.
Your party is unbelievably lucky to be able to blame everything on covid.
OOPS.
My bad.
It makes me nostalgic. For the playground.
I still regret not staging an intervention...
https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/1366781318990876674
Asking for a friend.
If Sturgeon can survive this slam-dunk evidence of conspiracy, then she can survive anything, and the Scots may as well vote once, for her, as President for Life (and perhaps beyond) and have done with democracy and the rule of law
As Salmond said they had been stringing out the judicial review against external lawyers advice and lying to their QC's hoping that the court case would hurry up and collapse the judicial review before they were found out. Hence judge being less than happy and awarding Salmond more than £600K.
They are still trying to hide the external advice , hence threat of No Confidence vote if they don't put it out and not just what Swinney thinks is key.
https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1366816031730257926?s=20
I am sure it was a typo, and should have read "70% he wins the nomination if he runs"
https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1366816422056374275
Can there be anyone left in Scotland who seriously doubts there was a conspiracy, and then a cover-up?
I get that you can be a true believer in indy, and think the cause is greater than any man or woman, so the SNP still deserves your vote. That's fair enough. You hold your nose and tick the box. Sturgeon will be gone sooner or later
But I do not believe a sane, intelligent person can now doubt all this evidence, which increases daily
In a sentence: "We are terribly sorry we lied to the court, we did it because our client lied to us."
The first thing to know is that 'professional embarrassment' is a euphemism lawyers do not want to use. The most common reason is where your client in a criminal trial where they are pleading not guilty tells you they are guilty anyway. In this case they say that "assurances which have been given on instructions, turning out to be false". The lawyers are apologising, profusely, to the Court for basically lying to the Court and other side - and saying it happened 'on instructions' which means their client told them to say it. Presumably they didn't know their client was wrong/lying at the time, since it would be potentially career-ending to pass on a lie if they did.
What is this lie? Disclosure. In other words, Alex Salmond's lawyers brought this case against the government and as part of the litigation the government has a duty to search for relevant documents to his claims and hand them over to him (with some restrictions). They will have handed over a bunch of documents and signed a statement that nothing else relevant was in their records. However, at the very last minute, "further documents, highly relevant yet undisclosed" were found. In short: The government held back important documents which they had a legal duty to hand over.
Now, sometimes mistakes happen and documents get missed. Disclosure is an exercise carried out by human beings and people are fallible. However, the lawyers specifically note that the documents should have been found by the earlier searches. They "simply cannot understand" why they weren't. In a lawyer's way they are saying they think this was conspiracy rather than cock-up.
"You complete bunch of ****s. You've had us go into court lying our head off. And now, everyone can see how we lied our heads off. In black and white. Well, now you're f*cked. Our reputations are f*cked. Our case is f*cked.
You are so f*cked, you have no idea how f*cked you are, you complete ar*eholes, you are clusterf*cked. Rank tw*ttish amateurs.
Jesus f*cking H Christ."
So they will be daily interrogations about WHY she lied and HOW and WHY she won't resign. Dreadful