The US is surely making a mistake in moving to postal voting on demand. Will only increase peoples' suspicions about the validity of the ballot which Trump can be guaranteed to play on.
Try telling that to voters in Oregon and Washington. Where EVERY signature on returned ballot envelop, is checked against the voter's signature on file with election authorities (counties and Secretary of State.
Easy to allege fraud, when your Trump or a MAGA-maniac cultist, because you then believe that ANY ballot cast against you is ipso facto illegitmate.
Would it be fair to say that MAGA is the world's biggest cult? I can't think of anything on quite the same scale. Certainly not in the West.
Islam, Christianity, Budhism, etc all wave at this point…
They're not really cults though. Although they do have sub sections (eg evangelicals) that maybe fit the description.
How are the6 not cults? They are EXACTLY cults. Almost by definition.
Because only a small fraction of people who describe themselves as those things are zealous about it.
Look up the definition of ‘cult’. I think you are in for a shock… ‘A system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a figure or object’
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why are you worrying about such trivia, when the Tory Party has the knives out for your church that pretends to believe in a god?
It doesn't, as far as I can see not a single Tory MP has backed Williamson's ludicrous amendment. Indeed the only support it is getting is from a few leftwingers on the Labour benches but Starmer and the frontbench are ignoring it too
Note how our PBs own Sophist-in-Chief publishes a fib . . . that is directly contracted by his own source . . . then trys to weasle out of it by . . . wait for it . . . more sophistry.
Directed at our Moderator-in-Chief no less. Deserving of Ignobel award for brazen bullshitting.
When was the last time people in Washington state voted in person at voting places?
At the August 2024 primary, at "voting centers" (at least one per county) mostly serving people with disabilities, but open to any voter.
However, statewide all vote-by-mail elections date from 2011; see timeline below (source WA Secretary of State):
> Pre-1983: Washington Legislature authorized “permanent absentee” ballots for voters with disabilities and those age 65+, other voters to request absentee ballot for each election in writing.
> 1983: Special elections allowed to be conducted by mail ballot.
> 1991: Permanent absentee law expanded to allow any voter to join the list by request; once on the list they receive ballots for every election.
> 1993: Small precinct VBM law expanded to precincts with under 200 voters, some counties begin splitting precincts and moving to all VBM elections.
> 2005: Washington Legislature establishes VBM as a permanent option of the election process for all elections, allowing counties to choose.
> 2011: With 38 of 39 counties switched to VBM, Washington Legislature requires VBM statewide.
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why on earth would we need to change the law? Under the law as it stands today, if a driver causes a crash when carrying out a legal manoeuvre they are held liable for any damage caused. Why would we need to ban u-turns and 3 point turns? If you carry out such a manoeuvre without causing a crash, there is no problem. If you cause a crash, the fact the manoeuvre was legal is irrelevant.
Indeed but why should we be slamming the book at drivers doing perfectly legal manoeuvres? If manoeuvres are legal then drivers will do them even if a bit more risky, if they weren't legal fewer drivers would do them and there would be less risk of a crash
Two new polls out from Quinnipiac which seem strange given what you might expect .
In Georgia Trump leads 52 to 46 head to head . Trump up 2 and Harris up 1 since their last poll .
In North Carolina Harris leads 50 to 47 head to head . Trump down 2 Harris up 2 .
It’s quite hard to believe those numbers can co-exist !
Why do you think that? In additon to moe, also differences between one state and another.
Note that aftermath of Hurricane Helene is creating challenges for election workers AND voters in both GA and NC, which may (emphasis on conditional) impact Trump more than Harris, esp in western North Carolina. Where outside of Asheville and Boone are mostly rural.
50% in the Georgia poll said Trump is the best choice to protect democracy ! I despair , it must be very frustrating being a liberal sane person in the USA .
It appears, sadly, that people are attracted to dehumanising lies about immigrants and minorities being to blame for everything, as we see here too.
It’s tragic. Once you start de-humanizing people bad things happen . The US media are complicit in sanewashing Trump, instead of calling him out they’re dancing on the head of a pin. His campaign is a sea of hate.
The world's great hope has to be Elon Musk. Quite how and why he has his odd political views I've no idea. His views as to the future are really rather inspiring.
I’m convinced the climate will create possibly a billion refugees by 2060ish. Definitely likely if things continue as they are.
So the question becomes, ‘do you want one in nine people in concentration camps when you are old?’
Harris' problem is turnout of groups traditionally favourable to the Democrats. The upper end of her potential vote is more frothy than Trumps. It bothers to vote and she wins, no matter whether Trump gets his potential vote out or not.
The financial markets seem to be assuming Trump has got this, and at this point I think they are right.
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why on earth would we need to change the law? Under the law as it stands today, if a driver causes a crash when carrying out a legal manoeuvre they are held liable for any damage caused. Why would we need to ban u-turns and 3 point turns? If you carry out such a manoeuvre without causing a crash, there is no problem. If you cause a crash, the fact the manoeuvre was legal is irrelevant.
Indeed but why should we be slamming the book at drivers doing perfectly legal manoeuvres? If manoeuvres are legal then drivers will do them even if a bit more risky, if they weren't legal fewer drivers would do them and there would be less risk of a crash
Most traffic collisions happen at junctions; are you suggesting that we should outlaw turning left and right?
The triple lock will raise 100 million next year as some pensioners are drawn into tax
Utterly daft comment - it will cost many billion
Indeed, and because the DWP refuses or is unable to deduct ICT in the way every employer and every pension company in the land has too, those spensioners without private pensions will have to complete self-assessments. Often for a few £10s of tax due.
Utter madness.
Increase the personal allowance a bit.
I wouldn't be surprised for Reeves to increase the allowance to sugar the pill of higher taxes and borrowing
I suspect it will be the return of the age related personal allowance. A little extra for over 66s only to offset the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance.
I think if pensioners have high enough incomes that bring them into tax, they should pay it like the rest of us.
A better offset for WFP would be to expand eligibility for PC a bit.
So £13,000 pa income for a pensioner is 'like the rest of us' ?
No, actually.
Pensioners typically have much lower housing costs (70% own their homes outright, and only 7% privately rent) and fewer dependents, so their equivalised household income after housing costs are, on average, much higher than the rest of the population even with the same income.
If we were to adjust the personal allowance to take account of these factors, it would be significantly lower, on average, for pensioners.
Of course, a significant proportion of pensioners are in poverty, which makes the vast wealth and high incomes of other pensioners all the more intolerable when it comes to freebies like WFP. Means testing pensioner benefits, using something like an expanded Pension Credit, is by far the most equitable option.
do you have evidence that 70% own their homes outright, sounds bollox to me. I can see you at forefront of pensioner culling as well, some crazy thing against pensioners whilst being loaded, pretty shabby to say the least. Hopefully you have feck all when you are a pensioner.
England and Wales, admittedly. I'll fish the stats for Scotland out for you.
Good evening from a dull and long flight to Seoul.
Is business really “pricing in” a Trump win? I’m not entirely sure of that. My completely non-scientific vibe is that Kamala has the edge because of a superior ground and air war.
As for the Jenrick poll, it’s obviously fraudulent. Suspect most voters don’t know Jenrick well enough to have an opinion and this agnosticism polls better than Kemi who is better known and has already turned off certain voters.
Jenrick is electoral kryptonite, though to be honest if Lord Frost is still a going concern in today’s Tory party it doesn’t really matter who they go for, nobody wants them back for a very, very long time.
More than half of Americans think upper-income folks pay too little in taxes
I think this is why juries in America tend to award the most ridiculously large sums in financial settlement cases, because it's the only way of forcing corporations to pay more. Like $50 million because someone has spilt some hot coffee on themselves in a fast food restaurant. Just an example.
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why are you worrying about such trivia, when the Tory Party has the knives out for your church that pretends to believe in a god?
It doesn't, as far as I can see not a single Tory MP has backed Williamson's ludicrous amendment. Indeed the only support it is getting is from a few leftwingers on the Labour benches but Starmer and the frontbench are ignoring it too
Absolute joke amendment. Complete time-wasting from Gavin Williamson, as per.
Allie Hodgkins-Brown @AllieHBNews · 29m Thursday’s i: “Benefits to rise £1.50 a week - as Reeves faces Labour backlash” #TomorrowsPapersToday
I would normally complain about an un-linked tweet, but twitter/x/it's gone back to showing non-users nothing at all unless you sign up. So whatever. Post unsourced, unshareable, material galore!
Harris' problem is turnout of groups traditionally favourable to the Democrats. The upper end of her potential vote is more frothy than Trumps. It bothers to vote and she wins, no matter whether Trump gets his potential vote out or not.
The financial markets seem to be assuming Trump has got this, and at this point I think they are right.
Harris' problem is turnout of groups traditionally favourable to the Democrats. The upper end of her potential vote is more frothy than Trumps. It bothers to vote and she wins, no matter whether Trump gets his potential vote out or not.
The financial markets seem to be assuming Trump has got this, and at this point I think they are right.
Two new polls out from Quinnipiac which seem strange given what you might expect .
In Georgia Trump leads 52 to 46 head to head . Trump up 2 and Harris up 1 since their last poll .
In North Carolina Harris leads 50 to 47 head to head . Trump down 2 Harris up 2 .
It’s quite hard to believe those numbers can co-exist !
Why do you think that? In additon to moe, also differences between one state and another.
Note that aftermath of Hurricane Helene is creating challenges for election workers AND voters in both GA and NC, which may (emphasis on conditional) impact Trump more than Harris, esp in western North Carolina. Where outside of Asheville and Boone are mostly rural.
50% in the Georgia poll said Trump is the best choice to protect democracy ! I despair , it must be very frustrating being a liberal sane person in the USA .
It appears, sadly, that people are attracted to dehumanising lies about immigrants and minorities being to blame for everything, as we see here too.
It’s tragic. Once you start de-humanizing people bad things happen . The US media are complicit in sanewashing Trump, instead of calling him out they’re dancing on the head of a pin. His campaign is a sea of hate.
The world's great hope has to be Elon Musk. Quite how and why he has his odd political views I've no idea. His views as to the future are really rather inspiring.
I’m convinced the climate will create possibly a billion refugees by 2060ish. Definitely likely if things continue as they are.
So the question becomes, ‘do you want one in nine people in concentration camps when you are old?’
I'm not sure quite why you're connecting these things, but of course they connect.
A billion refugees won't be an issue. They'll just die, and can I live with that reality - I'm sure I can - if there's a billion chimpanzees all of a sudden, what happens.
More than half of Americans think upper-income folks pay too little in taxes
I think this is why juries in America tend to award the most ridiculously large sums in financial settlement cases, because it's the only way of forcing corporations to pay more. Like $50 million because someone has spilt some hot coffee on themselves in a fast food restaurant. Just an example.
Which awards typically get vastly reduced by the appellate courts
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why on earth would we need to change the law? Under the law as it stands today, if a driver causes a crash when carrying out a legal manoeuvre they are held liable for any damage caused. Why would we need to ban u-turns and 3 point turns? If you carry out such a manoeuvre without causing a crash, there is no problem. If you cause a crash, the fact the manoeuvre was legal is irrelevant.
Indeed but why should we be slamming the book at drivers doing perfectly legal manoeuvres? If manoeuvres are legal then drivers will do them even if a bit more risky, if they weren't legal fewer drivers would do them and there would be less risk of a crash
Most traffic collisions happen at junctions; are you suggesting that we should outlaw turning left and right?
No but that does not mean you can’t outlaw u turns on roads over 30mph and halve the speed limit on rural roads to 30mph and make a 25mph limit on bends in roads
One from my beat, which seems small but is important and strategic.
National Highways to stop using the word ‘accident’
National Highways has confirmed it will phase out the use of the word ‘accident’ from its communications, in what is being branded as a ‘significant step forward’ in recognising the preventable nature of road collisions.
As a measure of how stuck in the past this organisation is, it has taken a decade of campaigning by Parliamentarians and road safety organisations to get them to move even this far.
If we are going to start blaming drivers for fault while doing legal manoeuvres causing crashes previously considered accidents then we also need to start changing the law to follow suit.
Why on earth would we need to change the law? Under the law as it stands today, if a driver causes a crash when carrying out a legal manoeuvre they are held liable for any damage caused. Why would we need to ban u-turns and 3 point turns? If you carry out such a manoeuvre without causing a crash, there is no problem. If you cause a crash, the fact the manoeuvre was legal is irrelevant.
Indeed but why should we be slamming the book at drivers doing perfectly legal manoeuvres? If manoeuvres are legal then drivers will do them even if a bit more risky, if they weren't legal fewer drivers would do them and there would be less risk of a crash
Most traffic collisions happen at junctions; are you suggesting that we should outlaw turning left and right?
No but that does not mean you can’t outlaw u turns on roads over 30mph and halve the speed limit on rural roads to 30mph and make a 25mph limit on bends in roads
"Make a 25 mph limit on bends in roads"??!
I don't multipunctuate lightly, but, well, that's daft.
Good evening from a dull and long flight to Seoul.
Is business really “pricing in” a Trump win? I’m not entirely sure of that. My completely non-scientific vibe is that Kamala has the edge because of a superior ground and air war.
As for the Jenrick poll, it’s obviously fraudulent. Suspect most voters don’t know Jenrick well enough to have an opinion and this agnosticism polls better than Kemi who is better known and has already turned off certain voters.
Jenrick is electoral kryptonite, though to be honest if Lord Frost is still a going concern in today’s Tory party it doesn’t really matter who they go for, nobody wants them back for a very, very long time.
Many Labour voters are already regretting their vote, the next general election is wide open
Scratches head at why it all kicked off...the bloke says well it seems like blue collar black men are going for Trump, white collar are sticking with dems....and that is so controversial because? Isn't this exactly what is happening with white men as well?
As previously reported here, in Plains, Georgia centenarian & former POTUS Jimmy Carter has cast his ballot for the 2024 general election.
Note that, under GA law at the time, JC was first eligible to vote in 1944. And almost certainly cast it for Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won his home county of Sumter by 1,550 (88.8%) versus 150 (11.2% for Republican challenger Tom Dewey.
One Direction singer Liam Payne found dead in Buenos Aires, local media reports
Honestly haven't heard of him, but rest in peace.
Newsnight stopped and Vick breathlessly said she is interrupting the show for some big and breaking news.
I honestly thought she was going to say Israel has bombed nuke sites in Iran or Trump has had a heart attack.
But no.
It is some shite about One Direction.
The BBC is so lost.
I suggest you get out more, for girls and women under 35 this will be as big news as when Elvis or Michael Jackson or Buddy Holly died
I beg to differ. People of all ages had heard of those stars, whereas that isn't true with One Direction.
Elvis defined a generation.
One Direction just helped make Cowell a bit richer.
Payne had a somewhat significant solo career here and in the USA.
Indeed and this is headline news in the US as well as here and around the world. One Direction were the biggest British boy/male band to crack America after the Beatles and Rolling Stones
Nathan 'Diamond Dog' Jones: [intentionally antagonizing him] Yee-haw! What's on your mind, Hillbilly?
Cameron Poe: What was I thinking about? Oh, yeah, "yee-haw", that's right. I was just wondering what a black militant - that would be you - was doin' takin' orders from a white boy on a power trip? Don't you think that's strange?
Nathan 'Diamond Dog' Jones: It's a means to an end, my white friend. A means to an end. See, I's can play house n***** tills we get to where we're goin'. And then, the Day of the Dog begins!
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
One Direction singer Liam Payne found dead in Buenos Aires, local media reports
Honestly haven't heard of him, but rest in peace.
Newsnight stopped and Vick breathlessly said she is interrupting the show for some big and breaking news.
I honestly thought she was going to say Israel has bombed nuke sites in Iran or Trump has had a heart attack.
But no.
It is some shite about One Direction.
The BBC is so lost.
I suggest you get out more, for girls and women under 35 this will be as big news as when Elvis or Michael Jackson or Buddy Holly died
I beg to differ. People of all ages had heard of those stars, whereas that isn't true with One Direction.
Elvis defined a generation.
One Direction just helped make Cowell a bit richer.
Payne had a somewhat significant solo career here and in the USA.
Significant, but ultimately suffered from the curse of a lot of boybanders in terms there generally only being one who can become the superstar - and it was Harry Styles.
Partly because he made the dud career choice of following what was the in thing right then and trying to do hip-hop and EDM music meets pop, rather than something could age into as their fans did. As Styles has done by borrowing from classic pop and rock and introducing it to an audience to whom it sounds rather fresh.
Seemed to struggle with the fact had largely been written off as a top tier solo star after the initial burst of carryover success from 1D and several collaborations with big names.
Which seems strange to say about someone gone at 31. All very sad.
Harris' problem is turnout of groups traditionally favourable to the Democrats. The upper end of her potential vote is more frothy than Trumps. It bothers to vote and she wins, no matter whether Trump gets his potential vote out or not.
The financial markets seem to be assuming Trump has got this, and at this point I think they are right.
The financial markets were pretty sure that Remain had won the Brexit vote. There is no evidence they are any smarter than the betting markets.
My personal view is that Trump has a high 50s chance of getting elected; but no more than that. If he goes above 60% on the exchanges, I might have a nibble on Harris.
FWIW, I have been in three states in the last month: California (where I live), Nevada (where we will be launching soon), and Arizona.
Arizona is blanketed by political adverts and posters. From sheer volume numbers, you'd think Harris was leading, but this is skewed by the fact that I'm in Phoenix. I would note that Gallegos and abortion referendum signs are probably at least as common - if not more common that - Harris ones. Kari Lake signs are few and far between.
Nevada: you wouldn't know there was an election on. Now, this may be because I'm on the strip in Las Vegas, but other than a single billboard trumpeting Harris having voted for Medicare expansion, there is literally no evidence that there is an election on,
California: must more activity than 2020, and many more Trump signs. I'm in a pretty wealthy neighbourhood and - sure - Harris signs outnumber Trump ones. But in 2020 it was 8-to-1; now it is 3 or 4-to-1. And the Trump signs are definitely bigger too. People want to really proclaim they're voting for the old guy.
I hear that revenues on the first part of the Bee Bus network in Manchester to be nationalised are 15% higher than forecast in the first 6months, the routes are costing a third less to operate than before and the average age of the buses has nearly halved.
The number of fully electric buses has risen ten fold.
"Today, the Guardian, alongside @hopenothate , today publish an in depth undercover investigation into the efforts of a network of far right race and IQ obsessives, who have been trying to influence discourse about race science."
It's a good job we don't have a race and IQ obsessive on here...
Rutherford and Hope Not Hate are aggressive activists. I'd take anything they say with a pinch of salt.
Agree about HnH. Not about Rutherford, though. And they have a point with the 'science' these people invent.
HnH usually get things about right. They publish enough detail that if they got it wrong they could be taken to the cleaners in Court.
AFAICS it works the other way. Farage accused them of using 'violent and undemocratic' methods back in 2016 and ended up making a public apology:
In the settlement, Farage agreed a statement saying: “On 20 December 2016, I gave an interview on LBC radio’s Nick Ferrari at Breakfast programme, in which I suggested that while Hope Not Hate purports to be peaceful, it in fact pursued violent and undemocratic means to achieve its objectives.
“Having now considered the position further I am happy to acknowledge that Hope Not Hate does not tolerate or pursue violent or undemocratic behaviour.
“For its part, Hope Not Hate has made clear that if any individuals claiming to be its supporters were to behave in such a way, that would be totally unacceptable.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
FWIW, I have Harris winning both PV and EC, Dems taking the House with a small majority, and either GOP taking the Senate 51:49 or it being tied 50:50 (so with Walz as the deciding vote) with the former the more likely.
Baier: More than 70% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track... You've been in office for 3.5 years
Kamala: "And Donald Trump has been running for office."
Baier: "But you've been the person holding the office."
I watched the interview; she was surprisingly unwooden, and that was the nearest thing to a gotcha moment. All in all, I think she acquitted herself reasonably well,
Baier: More than 70% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track... You've been in office for 3.5 years
Kamala: "And Donald Trump has been running for office."
Baier: "But you've been the person holding the office."
I watched the interview; she was surprisingly unwooden, and that was the nearest thing to a gotcha moment. All in all, I think she acquitted herself reasonably well,
I don’t think it was any worse than the 60 Minutes interview last week, but she comes across as being really evasive, talking in platitudes but with nothing actually behind them, and of acting as if she had nothing to do with the last four years despite being the incumbent VP.
Meanwhile, Republican Twitter is laughing themselves silly and saying please Kamala do Joe Rogan, while Democrat Twitter is either saying nothing out of a hatred of Fox News, or saying that it’s the best political interview of all time.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
FWIW, I have Harris winning both PV and EC, Dems taking the House with a small majority, and either GOP taking the Senate 51:49 or it being tied 50:50 (so with Walz as the deciding vote) with the former the more likely.
I think the Republicans will gain West Virginia (obviously), Montana, and Ohio, in the Senate. But, Fisher’s seat in Nebraska is a coin toss.
My God! Trump's official 'war room' says Kamala had a car-crash interview!
(Faints in shock)
Trump war room said “Our newest ad just dropped” and posted the Harris interview in full.
They should have put “I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message” at the end.
And how many of the Trump supporters would actually watch it all, and how many would just take the 'headline' take - in other words, what they say it means?
It's the old trick of a headline being contradictory to the actual message.
Scratches head at why it all kicked off...the bloke says well it seems like blue collar black men are going for Trump, white collar are sticking with dems....and that is so controversial because? Isn't this exactly what is happening with white men as well?
Because he chose a specific turn of phrase that everyone would know. I’ve never studied Malcolm X but I immediately knew he was referring to “house negro” and “field negro”.
Any wider point - which is relevant - was lost under that. But he got to go to his mates and say “how clever I was”
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
FWIW, I have Harris winning both PV and EC, Dems taking the House with a small majority, and either GOP taking the Senate 51:49 or it being tied 50:50 (so with Walz as the deciding vote) with the former the more likely.
I think the Republicans will gain West Virginia (obviously), Montana, and Ohio, in the Senate. But, Fisher’s seat in Nebraska is a coin toss.
I think Brown is safe in Ohio, and Cruz is the joker in the pack. Allred crucified him in the debate.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
I am considering that bet, the problem I have is working through the (then) logical conclusions for what it suggests for the overall result.
If Trump wins the PV vote, that means he has made fairly significant gains amongst certain groups. Which groups are those likely to be? WWC (particularly male), Hispanics and potentially Black males. In all three instances, they probably have outsized importance in swing states. So you would have to assume he has made gains in these groups but, geographically, not in the areas he needs to win but the other non-important states. Possible but unlikely.
As you say, it could be that he is surging in blue areas such as CA and NY, and that is where most of his votes are coming from apart from the swing states. That is possible but then you probably would have the GOP tobe favourites to take the House, given the preponderance of swing seats in those states.
My thinking at the moment is, given the poor performance of the polling (especially at state level), you generally look more to what campaigns are doing and where money is going to determine what the campaigns are thinking. FWIW, I do wonder what the US threatening to ban some arms sales to Israel has to do with what the Democrats are seeing in Michigan, with regards to the Arab vote.
FYI, two states caught my eye. One was New Mexico. Demographics similar to AZ / NV but very little polling done. The early voting totals so far are 50% Democrat / 37% Republican, which is decent for the former but I would have expected more. The other is Virginia. Just looking at a random sample of the counties, the percentage of mail in ballots returned generally looks higher in Republican counties than Democrat ones, although most of the early voting is in person.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
I am considering that bet, the problem I have is working through the (then) logical conclusions for what it suggests for the overall result.
If Trump wins the PV vote, that means he has made fairly significant gains amongst certain groups. Which groups are those likely to be? WWC (particularly male), Hispanics and potentially Black males. In all three instances, they probably have outsized importance in swing states. So you would have to assume he has made gains in these groups but, geographically, not in the areas he needs to win but the other non-important states. Possible but unlikely.
As you say, it could be that he is surging in blue areas such as CA and NY, and that is where most of his votes are coming from apart from the swing states. That is possible but then you probably would have the GOP tobe favourites to take the House, given the preponderance of swing seats in those states.
My thinking at the moment is, given the poor performance of the polling (especially at state level), you generally look more to what campaigns are doing and where money is going to determine what the campaigns are thinking. FWIW, I do wonder what the US threatening to ban some arms sales to Israel has to do with what the Democrats are seeing in Michigan, with regards to the Arab vote.
FYI, two states caught my eye. One was New Mexico. Demographics similar to AZ / NV but very little polling done. The early voting totals so far are 50% Democrat / 37% Republican, which is decent for the former but I would have expected more. The other is Virginia. Just looking at a random sample of the counties, the percentage of mail in ballots returned generally looks higher in Republican counties than Democrat ones, although most of the early voting is in person.
Start release some UK voting intention polls please - it's getting ridiculous.
Fair play to wikipedia - already showing Payne as dead.
Who are these wiki editor obsessives who never sleep?
It must be weird to be a public figure and see your every move/decision being instantly reported on there. It would drive me mad.
When my mother was a teenager she was taken on a school tour of the Times.
They showed her the draft of her father’s obituary that they kept on file…
Interesting story.
I think it was the Telegraph a few years ago did a piece on how their obituaries department works.
As you hinted at, they spend a lot of their time actually writing about people who are still alive, because it allows time for decent research while also having something ready to go quickly in the event of an untimely death. Occasionally they don’t have one ready for someone notable, and there’s a rush to get something written quickly.
They do pay attention to stories of people with particularly risky jobs or lifestyles, such as racing drivers and rock stars, and anyone else they see from news reports as likely to die suddenly or unexpectedly young, or is about to undertake a particularly risky endeavour.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
FWIW, I have Harris winning both PV and EC, Dems taking the House with a small majority, and either GOP taking the Senate 51:49 or it being tied 50:50 (so with Walz as the deciding vote) with the former the more likely.
I think the Republicans will gain West Virginia (obviously), Montana, and Ohio, in the Senate. But, Fisher’s seat in Nebraska is a coin toss.
I think Brown is safe in Ohio, and Cruz is the joker in the pack. Allred crucified him in the debate.
The Republicans are increasingly more positive about Michigan and Wisconsin for the Senate
More than half of Americans think upper-income folks pay too little in taxes
I think this is why juries in America tend to award the most ridiculously large sums in financial settlement cases, because it's the only way of forcing corporations to pay more. Like $50 million because someone has spilt some hot coffee on themselves in a fast food restaurant. Just an example.
I’m not aware of a case where a jury awarded $50 million for hot coffee being spilt. I presume that is a reference to Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, a case that is often trotted out, but which is generally misunderstood. Liebeck’s injuries were severe: she suffered third-degree burns and was hospitalised for 8 days, requiring surgery. The jury awarded her $2.7 million, reduced by the judge to $0.6 million. Liebeck and McDonald’s then made a confidential settlement while McD’s were appealing. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants for more.
Baier: More than 70% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track... You've been in office for 3.5 years
Kamala: "And Donald Trump has been running for office."
Baier: "But you've been the person holding the office."
I watched the interview; she was surprisingly unwooden, and that was the nearest thing to a gotcha moment. All in all, I think she acquitted herself reasonably well,
I don’t think it was any worse than the 60 Minutes interview last week, but she comes across as being really evasive, talking in platitudes but with nothing actually behind them, and of acting as if she had nothing to do with the last four years despite being the incumbent VP.
Meanwhile, Republican Twitter is laughing themselves silly and saying please Kamala do Joe Rogan, while Democrat Twitter is either saying nothing out of a hatred of Fox News, or saying that it’s the best political interview of all time.
Did she dance to her Spotify playlist for 30 min while not answering questions?
Baier: More than 70% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track... You've been in office for 3.5 years
Kamala: "And Donald Trump has been running for office."
Baier: "But you've been the person holding the office."
I watched the interview; she was surprisingly unwooden, and that was the nearest thing to a gotcha moment. All in all, I think she acquitted herself reasonably well,
I don’t think it was any worse than the 60 Minutes interview last week, but she comes across as being really evasive, talking in platitudes but with nothing actually behind them, and of acting as if she had nothing to do with the last four years despite being the incumbent VP.
Meanwhile, Republican Twitter is laughing themselves silly and saying please Kamala do Joe Rogan, while Democrat Twitter is either saying nothing out of a hatred of Fox News, or saying that it’s the best political interview of all time.
Did she dance to her Spotify playlist for 30 min while not answering questions?
You do know that Trump only did that because there was a medical emergency in the hall? He stopped the event so that paramedics could attend to those affected.
Kamala has just finished a good interview on Fox. Quite combative. She's on form.
I thought she did very well and didn’t take any nonsense from Brett Baier who was desperate for a gotcha moment and failed.
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
I have been recommending that bet (Trump PV, Harris EV) for some time. I think it is highly likely that Trump will dramatically outperform 2020 in NY and California, but put in a very similar performance in the swing states.
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
I am considering that bet, the problem I have is working through the (then) logical conclusions for what it suggests for the overall result.
If Trump wins the PV vote, that means he has made fairly significant gains amongst certain groups. Which groups are those likely to be? WWC (particularly male), Hispanics and potentially Black males. In all three instances, they probably have outsized importance in swing states. So you would have to assume he has made gains in these groups but, geographically, not in the areas he needs to win but the other non-important states. Possible but unlikely.
As you say, it could be that he is surging in blue areas such as CA and NY, and that is where most of his votes are coming from apart from the swing states. That is possible but then you probably would have the GOP tobe favourites to take the House, given the preponderance of swing seats in those states.
My thinking at the moment is, given the poor performance of the polling (especially at state level), you generally look more to what campaigns are doing and where money is going to determine what the campaigns are thinking. FWIW, I do wonder what the US threatening to ban some arms sales to Israel has to do with what the Democrats are seeing in Michigan, with regards to the Arab vote.
FYI, two states caught my eye. One was New Mexico. Demographics similar to AZ / NV but very little polling done. The early voting totals so far are 50% Democrat / 37% Republican, which is decent for the former but I would have expected more. The other is Virginia. Just looking at a random sample of the counties, the percentage of mail in ballots returned generally looks higher in Republican counties than Democrat ones, although most of the early voting is in person.
Start release some UK voting intention polls please - it's getting ridiculous.
We’ve had 7 in October. That’s more than one every 3 days. Why on earth do we need more?
Comments
‘A system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a figure or object’
However, statewide all vote-by-mail elections date from 2011; see timeline below (source WA Secretary of State):
> Pre-1983: Washington Legislature authorized “permanent absentee” ballots for voters
with disabilities and those age 65+, other voters to request absentee ballot for each election in writing.
> 1983: Special elections allowed to be conducted by mail ballot.
> 1991: Permanent absentee law expanded to allow any voter to join the list by request; once on the list they receive ballots for every election.
> 1993: Small precinct VBM law expanded to precincts with under 200 voters, some counties begin splitting precincts and moving to all VBM elections.
> 2005: Washington Legislature establishes VBM as a permanent option of the election process for all elections, allowing counties to choose.
> 2011: With 38 of 39 counties switched to VBM, Washington Legislature requires VBM statewide.
https://www.sos.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/wa_vbm.pdf
AND here is timeline for vote-by-mail in Oregon, first state in the union to adopt all VBM.
https://www.multco.us/elections/brief-history-vote-mail-oregon
One Direction singer Liam Payne found dead in Buenos Aires, local media reports
I’m convinced the climate will create possibly a billion refugees by 2060ish. Definitely likely if things continue as they are.
So the question becomes, ‘do you want one in nine people in concentration camps when you are old?’
26C and clear skies in Ise-shima today. Sweet
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4934604-kamala-harris-ground-game-gotv/
The money that should have gone on these has gone on his legal fees. This will have a huge knock-on effect down ballot too.
70% of Americans don't believe corporations pay their fair share in taxes
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1846671728216310119
More than half of Americans think upper-income folks pay too little in taxes
Is business really “pricing in” a Trump win? I’m not entirely sure of that. My completely non-scientific vibe is that Kamala has the edge because of a superior ground and air war.
As for the Jenrick poll, it’s obviously fraudulent.
Suspect most voters don’t know Jenrick well enough to have an opinion and this agnosticism polls better than Kemi who is better known and has already turned off certain voters.
Jenrick is electoral kryptonite, though to be honest if Lord Frost is still a going concern in today’s Tory party it doesn’t really matter who they go for, nobody wants them back for a very, very long time.
I honestly thought she was going to say Israel has bombed nuke sites in Iran or Trump has had a heart attack.
But no.
It is some shite about One Direction.
The BBC is so lost.
Complete time-wasting from Gavin Williamson, as per.
You only have to look at the crowds for his rallies to know he is more popular than Jesus.
A billion refugees won't be an issue. They'll just die, and can I live with that reality - I'm sure I can - if there's a billion chimpanzees all of a sudden, what happens.
Wasn`t he recently accused of `obsessive contact` by someone.
Very sad.
I don't multipunctuate lightly, but, well, that's daft.
The BBC is supposed to offer up something more nutritious.
Anna Botting went down in my estimation by admitting she was a fan.
https://x.com/justinbaragona/status/1846528001330024537
I used to be a huge supporter but I think these days it is just an endless exercise of signing their own death warrant.
One Direction just helped make Cowell a bit richer.
Who are these wiki editor obsessives who never sleep?
See the "use in contemporary politics" section here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_slave
Note that, under GA law at the time, JC was first eligible to vote in 1944. And almost certainly cast it for Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won his home county of Sumter by 1,550 (88.8%) versus 150 (11.2% for Republican challenger Tom Dewey.
Or would you be reasurred that their IS an afterlife? AND that media can NOT report on it!
Cameron Poe: What was I thinking about? Oh, yeah, "yee-haw", that's right. I was just wondering what a black militant - that would be you - was doin' takin' orders from a white boy on a power trip? Don't you think that's strange?
Nathan 'Diamond Dog' Jones: It's a means to an end, my white friend. A means to an end. See, I's can play house n***** tills we get to where we're goin'. And then, the Day of the Dog begins!
In terms of polls Fox just released their national poll which had Trump ahead by 2 , 50 to 48 with a caveat that Harris is leading by 6 points in the swing states which seems strange given the topline . One thing that I found interesting in the write up . Essentially Harris isn’t doing quite as well in deep blue states which she will still win and Trump is doing better in his deep red states .
This then opens up what would be a real irony if Harris loses the national vote but wins the EC ! Of course then Trump will implode of course forgetting that he did the same thing in 2016 .
I still think that scenario is somewhat unlikely but who knows !
However: I think it is nailed on that the Republicans take the Senate. The House, I would make the Democrats the (very narrow) favorites.
Partly because he made the dud career choice of following what was the in thing right then and trying to do hip-hop and EDM music meets pop, rather than something could age into as their fans did. As Styles has done by borrowing from classic pop and rock and introducing it to an audience to whom it sounds rather fresh.
Seemed to struggle with the fact had largely been written off as a top tier solo star after the initial burst of carryover success from 1D and several collaborations with big names.
Which seems strange to say about someone gone at 31. All very sad.
My personal view is that Trump has a high 50s chance of getting elected; but no more than that. If he goes above 60% on the exchanges, I might have a nibble on Harris.
FWIW, I have been in three states in the last month: California (where I live), Nevada (where we will be launching soon), and Arizona.
Arizona is blanketed by political adverts and posters. From sheer volume numbers, you'd think Harris was leading, but this is skewed by the fact that I'm in Phoenix. I would note that Gallegos and abortion referendum signs are probably at least as common - if not more common that - Harris ones. Kari Lake signs are few and far between.
Nevada: you wouldn't know there was an election on. Now, this may be because I'm on the strip in Las Vegas, but other than a single billboard trumpeting Harris having voted for Medicare expansion, there is literally no evidence that there is an election on,
California: must more activity than 2020, and many more Trump signs. I'm in a pretty wealthy neighbourhood and - sure - Harris signs outnumber Trump ones. But in 2020 it was 8-to-1; now it is 3 or 4-to-1. And the Trump signs are definitely bigger too. People want to really proclaim they're voting for the old guy.
He'll be Grumpy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1G7ckaNJho
AFAICS it works the other way. Farage accused them of using 'violent and undemocratic' methods back in 2016 and ended up making a public apology:
In the settlement, Farage agreed a statement saying: “On 20 December 2016, I gave an interview on LBC radio’s Nick Ferrari at Breakfast programme, in which I suggested that while Hope Not Hate purports to be peaceful, it in fact pursued violent and undemocratic means to achieve its objectives.
“Having now considered the position further I am happy to acknowledge that Hope Not Hate does not tolerate or pursue violent or undemocratic behaviour.
“For its part, Hope Not Hate has made clear that if any individuals claiming to be its supporters were to behave in such a way, that would be totally unacceptable.
“I am pleased that we have been able to resolve our differences.”
https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/nigel-farage-settles-libel-case-against-hope-not-hate-with-more-than-100k-in-court-costs/
Trump campaign just posted it in full on their own site.
https://x.com/trumpwarroom/status/1846694328137077032
Baier: More than 70% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track... You've been in office for 3.5 years
Kamala: "And Donald Trump has been running for office."
Baier: "But you've been the person holding the office."
(Faints in shock)
& what will be on the menu this evening ?
They should have put “I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message” at the end.
Meanwhile, Republican Twitter is laughing themselves silly and saying please Kamala do Joe Rogan, while Democrat Twitter is either saying nothing out of a hatred of Fox News, or saying that it’s the best political interview of all time.
It's the old trick of a headline being contradictory to the actual message.
They last Pakistan’s tail wag far too much, and now they’re going up end up behind.
Any wider point - which is relevant - was lost under that. But he got to go to his mates and say “how clever I was”
They showed her the draft of her father’s obituary that they kept on file…
If Trump wins the PV vote, that means he has made fairly significant gains amongst certain groups. Which groups are those likely to be? WWC (particularly male), Hispanics and potentially Black males. In all three instances, they probably have outsized importance in swing states. So you would have to assume he has made gains in these groups but, geographically, not in the areas he needs to win but the other non-important states. Possible but unlikely.
As you say, it could be that he is surging in blue areas such as CA and NY, and that is where most of his votes are coming from apart from the swing states. That is possible but then you probably would have the GOP tobe favourites to take the House, given the preponderance of swing seats in those states.
My thinking at the moment is, given the poor performance of the polling (especially at state level), you generally look more to what campaigns are doing and where money is going to determine what the campaigns are thinking. FWIW, I do wonder what the US threatening to ban some arms sales to Israel has to do with what the Democrats are seeing in Michigan, with regards to the Arab vote.
FYI, two states caught my eye. One was New Mexico. Demographics similar to AZ / NV but very little polling done. The early voting totals so far are 50% Democrat / 37% Republican, which is decent for the former but I would have expected more. The other is Virginia. Just looking at a random sample of the counties, the percentage of mail in ballots returned generally looks higher in Republican counties than Democrat ones, although most of the early voting is in person.
I think it was the Telegraph a few years ago did a piece on how their obituaries department works.
As you hinted at, they spend a lot of their time actually writing about people who are still alive, because it allows time for decent research while also having something ready to go quickly in the event of an untimely death. Occasionally they don’t have one ready for someone notable, and there’s a rush to get something written quickly.
They do pay attention to stories of people with particularly risky jobs or lifestyles, such as racing drivers and rock stars, and anyone else they see from news reports as likely to die suddenly or unexpectedly young, or is about to undertake a particularly risky endeavour.
Biggest story in the world (BBC) is a former One Direction star dying in an accident.
Hmm.
More interesting is, down the order, rising diplomatic tensions between Canada and India.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gl73r031xo