£40 on Biden to win Georgia @ 1.7.
How has no decent mentalist done a Columbine on one of these counting centres yet?
What’s the story now lads?
Still counting the last few states, Biden almost certainly the winner.
The Pennsylvania secretary of state reckons they might be able to finish counting most of their votes by the end of the night.
If Biden wins (which looks very likely) he's won.
It feels like it should be done by now so I'm still braced for all outcomes.
Trump is still ahead in Georgia, North Carolina and Pennsylvania (which would give him the win) isn't he?
He is but that would not give him the win. He would also need Arizona or Nevada.
No.
He'd still need one of Nevada or Arizona.
He doesn't look likely to hold Georgia and Pennsylvania anyway.
The one thing I don't understand is every shot of the counting centres has about 6 people not doing anything with any sense of urgency. Get a fucking move on you mongs.
Biden needs 58-61% of the remaining votes in Pennsylvania to take it and he's been taking around 75% of the votes in the last 24 hours.
Biggest difference between the Trumpies and the OG Italian fascists is that, for all their noise, they still haven't been willing to go full blackshirt.
I'd say there's a pretty good chance Biden will win Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia, albeit by a tiny margin in Georgia.
And if that's the case, then you'd have to say this presidential election hasn't been particularly close, it's just been made to look that way by the unique timing of the ballot counting this year. But that false perception (that it was actually very close, and potentially even stolen by Democrats) will be enough to fuel the GOP fire for the next four years.
Yeah, it's like the Trumpettes got their votes in early and it's swung back the other way hard.
It's still a bit too close though isn't it bearing in mind how they framed it (and have constantly framed it). If you can only just win an existential 'unity' election it suggests their is a solid base for a less vulgar woman-friendly twat to blast you next time.
Definitely. It's clearly not the landslide which would wipe out Trumpism, as a lot had hoped, and Democrats are going to have to rethink a lot of their strategy now that they see that these Trump voters haven't magically disappeared. That reality check is probably a good thing going forward (if the DNC aren't too thick and useless to get it, which is possible).
All I'm saying is that the unique timeline along which things have unfolded plays particularly well into the Trump grievance complex. You're going to have a sizeable percent of the population who think this election was stolen, which wouldn't have happened if the results had been announced in reverse order (for example).
Everyone mugs off the vote count racing saddos in the UK election but now they have earned their smug satisfaction.
Proper cringing at my spelling mistake there. STOP THE THREAD!
It was actually intentional, the Republican-controlled state legislature in PA prevented them from beginning to count mail-in ballots until the polls had closed (compared to lots of other states which started way earlier). They knew that the 'red mirage' on election night might give Trump a chance to claim victory - at best to stop the counting, at worst to claim it had all been stolen from him.
I had an otherwise really intelligent friend of mine the other day still behoved to the notion that people voting for Trump are doing it as some sort of protest.
It's seemingly very hard for people to accept (let alone comprehend why) that he's fucking popular and people vote for him because they like him.
@Lewis
I think they should put much more faith in the state parties. I go to the party meetings here in Maricopa and the AZ state party has had a very clear plan that they have executed really well. It started a decade ago by winning a referendum on getting redistricting done not by the state legislature but by independent commission. That led to an environment where now 5 of 9 of the House delegation are D and one chamber of the state legislature may break D. They also prioritize Hispanic outreach through the Service Unions instead of walking around going “wow, you are brown let’s talk immigration!!!” This has helped pick up two straight statewide Senate wins and maybe the presidential. It is very impressive when you consider the last statewide win was in 92.
It is far more successful than the airlifted $150 million ad campaigns in Kentucky and South Carolina that are R+20 states. Build a grassroots party first. Otherwise you get a Biden which will sometimes win or lose. You’ll absolutely never get any of the progressive policies until you start being competitive in Kansas or Iowa. And it will just swing back to R’s in the next cycle.
Is there any tangible evidence for the insane ad spends in American politics making a blind bit of difference to anything?
Consultants have big homes?
Trump spent less in 2016; Biden spent the least in the primary. Money does help in two ways. At the national level we are just a massive country and money is needed to get enough name recognition if you are not a pre-aware brand. We had three popular governors (including from red states) and they couldn’t get the profile to compete in the primary. On a state level, lots of races for State Legislature or whatever are won simply because one side has a professional campaign (maybe 10-30k) and the other does not. It is how R’s racked up all those wins inside states.
Last edited by mikem; 05-11-2020 at 09:10 PM.
Back to this point, I'm not sure how much the enthusiasm for Trump can just transfer to somebody else. He's a really unique candidate, and someone who's less vulgar and more woman-friendly would probably have a much harder time generating the kind of enthusiasm he does; people love him and despise him for exactly the same reasons.
That's probably going to be one of the biggest questions of the next few years, whether any other Republican can fill his place. Same problem with Bernie and the progressive left.
This is uncanny.
Bang on about Scooby Doo too.
Trump's lead down to 78k in Pennsylvania now
Looking at Betfair market and Kamala is coming in at 500s. If sleepy Joe wakes up no longer in the next 2 months, does it automatically become her?
Stick your house on it.
Edit: Scenario 4: https://www.vox.com/21502447/trump-b...h-what-happens
It seems that they don't really know what would happen. The Vice President Elect would be the logical choice but...
Last edited by Sir Andy Mahowry; 05-11-2020 at 11:08 PM.
Trump to say some words at half past.
Those will be "Great. Thank you. BEST!"
Half past the current hour (so in just over 10 minutes) and it will probably be shown everywhere.
I'm watching CNN but I imagine all news outlets will show it.
The whole of twitter seems to be watching CNN. Why? This was over 36 hours ago.
I'm locked on to BBC. Out of baby oil so I've had to down a pint of milk to get the saliva consistency right. Let's go.
The numbers have always suggested that he does well in spite of himself, i.e. winning last time out with barely any more votes than the previous stiffs, and that people like Trumpism - border wall, [economic] nationalism, etc. - more than they like the silly bastard pushing it. He just had the force of personality to actually get it a hearing when it would normally be squashed by the party machine like when Pat Buchanan was advocating the exact same stuff in the nineties; but it is established now, and the 'Trump Republican' is a thing, so he has done his bit not unlike how Bernie 'Bernie' Sanders has made the pinko wing an on-going concern for his side.
From a voting point of view, the sort of people who get RIGHT INTO IT, with the pick-up trucks and the flags and all that shite, are overwhelmingly likely to vote Republican anyway (or at least for a 'Trump Republican'), so they just need someone to hold the rest of the Trump program[me] together to keep the wider working class vote intact. Get somebody ostensibly normal who still wants to kick immigrants and 'Big Tech' around and you're laughing, especially if the next Democrat candidate is some awful woman folding her arms at half the country (which it will be). Tom Cotton would be my early favourite, with his military background and ability to speak normally. They - both sides - need to study what has gone on here over the past few years, and our Conservative Party need to be watching with half an eye on what they replace Boris Johnson with.
The reason he's done so well though is because he's managed to get a HUGE turnout from farmers/hicks/mongs from backwater places, isn't it?
Would they still get that level of turnout from someone else?
I think you underestimate Trump's warlock-like powers as a hypnotist; when you ask supporters what they like about him, it's often precisely his refusal to "speak normally." I agree that someone like Cotton (alias @7om) is the natural choice as successor, and he's probably going to run, but I'm not sure he'll be able to generate the same cult-like enthusiasm as Trump does.
There's also definitely going to be some competition in terms of people trying to tie themselves to him, so the Trump conservatives won't necessarily all automatically unite.
@Lewis
Last edited by Spoonsky; 05-11-2020 at 11:42 PM.
He's fucking lost it.
Yeah, they like it; but 1) actual 'Trump supporters' are a small minority of his actual vote; and 2) they will still vote for the Republican Party if his successors is sufficiently pro-gun and anti-nonce. I suppose he was probably necessary in shaking things up and sticking rocket boosters on the re-alignment that had been going on for years, but the hard work has been done there, like how Brexit coaxed certain places into defying the Labour Party for the first time in their lives, so the first-timers and lifelong Democrats who you could say he won over are an easier win now.
Fake polls for fake news.
This is immense.
He's complaining about how one sided the postal votes are despite telling his supporters not to vote via mail...
Extreme projection within the anti nonce brigade.