|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Feb 3, 2021 22:09:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Feb 5, 2021 16:05:50 GMT
meanwhile back in la-la land...
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Feb 7, 2021 16:41:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Feb 8, 2021 15:51:22 GMT
Actually, if anyone had widely advertised odds of about 17-1 for Biden, I think there would have been quite a few takers. the Dem primary was still pretty open and they were always going to choose the "stop Bernie" candidate; then it become a straight fight between Trump and the Dem candidate..and whilst Trump was favourite a year ago (I think?) it was still a close race.
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Feb 11, 2021 22:26:18 GMT
Apologies if already posted:-
Concurs with previous surveys although surprised at the small size of the liberal right in America (and that quadrant opted for Biden).
|
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on Feb 11, 2021 22:29:44 GMT
Apologies if already posted:- Concurs with previous surveys although surprised at the small size of the liberal right in America (and that quadrant opted for Biden). It looks like this only includes Biden and Trump voters, so perhaps the conservative liberal group would be boosted a bit by Jorgensen voters? |
|
therealriga
Non-Aligned
none
Posts: 2,840 
Member is Online
|
Post by therealriga on Feb 12, 2021 5:25:46 GMT
Actually, if anyone had widely advertised odds of about 17-1 for Biden, I think there would have been quite a few takers. the Dem primary was still pretty open and they were always going to choose the "stop Bernie" candidate; then it become a straight fight between Trump and the Dem candidate..and whilst Trump was favourite a year ago (I think?) it was still a close race. Sometime last January, I bet on Biden to get the nomination at 6/5. After early Saunders victories, Biden drifted to 12-1 and I'd given up on the bet. People forget how unlikely it looked at one point. Trump at that time was favorite, albeit not a heavy one, at around 4/5. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Feb 12, 2021 16:36:32 GMT
Actually, if anyone had widely advertised odds of about 17-1 for Biden, I think there would have been quite a few takers. the Dem primary was still pretty open and they were always going to choose the "stop Bernie" candidate; then it become a straight fight between Trump and the Dem candidate..and whilst Trump was favourite a year ago (I think?) it was still a close race. Sometime last January, I bet on Biden to get the nomination at 6/5. After early Saunders victories, Biden drifted to 12-1 and I'd given up on the bet. People forget how unlikely it looked at one point. Trump at that time was favorite, albeit not a heavy one, at around 4/5. That Trump was the favourite until quite late in the Primary process is not notable, given the size of the Democratic field. It always looked like Trump was more likely to lose than to win, but the sheer number of Democrat candidates meant it was relatively unlikely that any particular candidate would win. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Feb 12, 2021 18:25:04 GMT
Indeed. That was my point, the POTUS race at that time had Trump a slight favourite, IIRC, over any Dem candidate, and the Dem race was always going to be a straight fight between Bernie and whoever the moderates coalesced around. I think there was a time (was it after the NH caucus?) that Biden looked in trouble, but I think it was only a week or so later that he had a good result (in NCarolina?) and pretty soon after that he became clear favourite as the not-Bernie option. From that point it was probably slightly better than 50/50 whoever that was would beat Bernie and not far from 50/50 that whoever won that race would beat trump.
Certainly, unless it was in the immediate aftermath of NH, if I had found (or tbf been looking for) odds of around 17-1 or better on Biden being the next POTUS, I may well have had a tenner on it..
|
|
therealriga
Non-Aligned
none
Posts: 2,840
Member is Online
|
Post by therealriga on Feb 12, 2021 20:33:06 GMT
Sometime last January, I bet on Biden to get the nomination at 6/5. After early Saunders victories, Biden drifted to 12-1 and I'd given up on the bet. People forget how unlikely it looked at one point. Trump at that time was favorite, albeit not a heavy one, at around 4/5. That Trump was the favourite until quite late in the Primary process is not notable, given the size of the Democratic field. It always looked like Trump was more likely to lose than to win, but the sheer number of Democrat candidates meant it was relatively unlikely that any particular candidate would win. Decent economy and no major foreign or domestic policy missteps at that point would usually give a sitting president an edge. However, that was counterbalanced by Trump's volatile personality and erratic behavior making him longer than he otherwise would have been. That should have pushed him to evens, but there was always a hardcore of Trump backers who shortened his price and produced the 4/5. It was only from late May, when the BLM movement kicked in, that Trump fell more than 5% behind and was too stubborn and enamored by his own myth to do anything to change it. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,722
Member is Online
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Feb 12, 2021 22:26:16 GMT
That Trump was the favourite until quite late in the Primary process is not notable, given the size of the Democratic field. It always looked like Trump was more likely to lose than to win, but the sheer number of Democrat candidates meant it was relatively unlikely that any particular candidate would win. Decent economy and no major foreign or domestic policy missteps at that point would usually give a sitting president an edge. However, that was counterbalanced by Trump's volatile personality and erratic behavior making him longer than he otherwise would have been. That should have pushed him to evens, but there was always a hardcore of Trump backers who shortened his price and produced the 4/5. It was only from late May, when the BLM movement kicked in, that Trump fell more than 5% behind and was too stubborn and enamored by his own myth to do anything to change it. Not forgetting his response to Covid-1o, the biggest elephant in every room. |
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Feb 13, 2021 9:15:02 GMT
Just listened to an excellent episode of the Spectator's Americano podcast on the crooked dealings of the Lincoln Project, their apparent hacking of a former affiliate's Twitter account and their pedarest co founder. What a bunch of arseholes.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Feb 13, 2021 12:24:00 GMT
You're surprised that there aren't many decent people on the hard right of American politics? Honestly...?
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Feb 13, 2021 12:39:53 GMT
Just listened to an excellent episode of the Spectator's Americano podcast on the crooked dealings of the Lincoln Project, their apparent hacking of a former affiliate's Twitter account and their pedarest co founder. What a bunch of arseholes. Not really sure how one of the co-founders having led a sordid double life for decades tells you anything about the other people involved in the project. Unless it comes to light that they knew I don't think you can reasonably hold it against them. But yes, of course they can be arseholes. Politics is a dirty business and these guys are high level political operatives. They know how to fight dirty and know that it sometimes absolutely necessary. Plenty of their attacks on Trump, attacks on his family and staff, their doxing the lawyers working for him after the election, etc were morally dubious but probably justified given the stakes. Overall I would say that the likes of Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson and Stuart Stevens are all fundamentally good people. Schmidt has now resigned from the Board of the Lincoln Project, his statement below is well worth reading |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Feb 19, 2021 22:00:03 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2021 22:25:53 GMT
If every state used the system Maine and Nebraska use, the result would have been
Biden 277
Trump 261
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 20, 2021 9:14:04 GMT
If every state used the system Maine and Nebraska use, the result would have been Biden 277 Trump 261 I was close Thanks for the replies. I did cross-post onto one of the US threads and @ajs mentioned the Daily Kos one which as you say is incomplete. I was able to do a rough extrapolation for the incomplete states. 278 - 260 I made it, give or take a couple or so |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 20, 2021 10:33:11 GMT
Very close to the House result then. |
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Feb 22, 2021 19:49:28 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2021 8:03:12 GMT
Why Democrats lost Texas and how they can win it in 2024
|
|
