So my winning track record on political betting remains intact - an hour or two ago, I cashed out my bet on Biden for a decent profit, although I must admit it was a rollercoaster ride to get to that point, and I almost lost my nerve at one stage. Even though Biden was very much a value bet before the results started to come in, probably the optimum time to bet on him would have been at around 2am, when incredibly the odds implied that Trump had more than a 75% chance of winning. I couldn't make head nor tail of that, because at the time Biden had built up decent leads in Ohio and North Carolina - states he didn't even need to win. My best guess was that punters had massively overreacted to Trump holding Florida against expectations.
But of course, a couple of hours later, the tables had turned. Trump had not only secured a comeback win in Ohio and taken what looked like a decisive lead in North Carolina, he had also rapidly built up what looked like telling leads in states that were actually much more vital to Biden's chances, namely Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The experts repeatedly cautioned that those numbers might well be misleading due to the order in which different types of votes were being counted, but I remembered waiting for a Clinton comeback in those states in 2016 that never materialised, so I started to wonder if the sensible thing to do would be to cash out at a loss. I decided to risk seeing if anything had changed after a few hours sleep, and by the time I woke up, as if by magic, Biden had the upper hand in Michigan and Wisconsin. Although the margin in each case is narrow, those in the know are convinced it won't be overturned, meaning that Biden is assured of a majority in the electoral college unless Trump can overturn his narrow deficit in Nevada, which by all accounts is also unlikely. And even if an improbable comeback does occur somewhere, it still might not be enough if Biden squeezes out a win in Georgia, which is considered perfectly possible.
I would guess at this stage that Trump's main hope will be that Biden ends up owing his electoral college majority to a narrow win in a single state - that would at least give the appearance of reasonableness to any legal challenge. But if Trump needs the courts to alter the results in two or three states, his efforts to stay in office are going to look a bit desperate.
I don't actually think it'll take the army to remove him from the White House in January, but ideally he'll want to spin this out for as long as possible to build up a victim/conspiracy narrative, possibly with a view to another tilt at the presidency in 2024.
The bookies went 3/1 on for Trump a good hour & some before Florida was called. Would that be the 75% you referred to?
ReplyDeleteI think what may have happened was that on the day in votes (predominantly Trump) caused a surge before the early votes (pro Biden) were considered properly. Could be wrong, but that's my take.
Anyhoo, it's looking like Biden by that classic Scottishism, the bawhair! However Trump exits the White House it won't be gracefully, whether in January or 4 years hence.
"Independence for Scotland": Comment deleted. Isn't it rather ironic that you agreed with me a couple of weeks ago that people shouldn't be telling me what I can and can't blog about? If this site was "turning into a bookies", you would have noticed me running a book. Seen anything like that? Nope, thought not. Now, behave.
ReplyDeleteIfS didn't perchance, also make an uncharacteristic attack the SNP?
DeleteDon't think so, he was just laying down the law about how he thinks someone else should and shouldn't write a blog. Odd chap.
DeleteSorry James I wasn't telling you what to post. Just a humorous comment which you obviously didn't share. I'll stick to posting the truth and give attempts at humour a miss in future. After all the site has its own resident clown SS.
DeleteOk. Maybe he's out of sorts today!
DeleteI'm sure there's no need to worry and he'll be back to attacking pro-indy parties in no time.
SS - "wishful thinking on stilts" - James Kelly comment on your opinion about independence. Sounds right to me if you were truly an independence supporter.
DeleteD-oing, IfS arrived. With an anti-indy / anit-indy supporter post.
DeleteSSS - naw anti SSS - phoney independence supporter.
DeleteSSS (Scotish Skier Stalker) - "I'm struggling to see how the rest of your argument makes much sense" James Kelly on your thoughts on how Scotland can achieve independence.
DeleteIt doesn't make any sense for an independence supporter but it does if you are a phoney independence supporter like you triple S.
Yes, sure. Everyone thinks you support indy and I'm a unionist.
Delete:-)
SSS - glad to hear that all your multiple personalities now agree that you are all unionists. I, of course, would call your various personalities Britnats.
DeleteHowever, I forecast it will not be long before you are all back to disagreeing with each other.
Erm, riiiiight.
DeleteOkey dokey. Whatever you say there mr 'I'm not obsessed, I give everyone pet names, honestly!'.
SSS - is that all of your multiple personalities speaking as one?
DeleteIain, I'm sorry for deleting your comment, but you might be getting me into dangerous legal territory with that sort of prediction.
ReplyDeleteWell it does look like the Trump is going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming from the White House. No respecting the vote from the Yoons favourite golf playing Yankee dictator.
DeleteWell done you for cashing out early. Now we move on to the "Voter Fraud" issue because Trump won but is being denied by corruption.
ReplyDeleteFor example North Carolina has 5,160,000 registered voters but over 5.3m voted. Similar things have happened in other states. This aint over.
Reminds me of indyref 2014 where the postal vote was heavily in favour of "No". Same operation different country.
Lawsuits coming.
If voter fraud was widespread, maybe trump got a lot less votes than reported?
DeleteWould explain him doing a bit better than polling suggested.
Polls were deliberately slanted towards Biden, it's called creating the narrative. Trump won easily, the courts will agree the voter fraud and we will either get a rerun or a Trump win.
DeleteThe Deep State is wide and deep, extends into every corner of every country on the planet. The declassification of the criminality will be epic, it will assure Scottish Independence in a landslide, although I would hope that we are well gone before a vote is even necessary.
I heard my American colleague at work was in on the Trump plot. They are were! All of them!
DeleteThey're working with Peter Murrell against Salmond too.
Heard rumours Mi5 agents were stuffing postal votes for NO in 2014.
ReplyDeleteIt wisnae Democrats then though.
In USA they tally the votes as they come in. Unlike in Scotland when counting starts when all votes are in.
Only exception is when Ruth Davidson gets to announce live on TV that things are going "well" for NO on postal votes. Action taken?
There was actually - she's now a Baroness!
Ramstam - "In USA they tally the votes as they come in" - whilst it is true that a lot of states start counting the postal votes before the final day for voting in person that is not the case across all states. eg, Pennsylvania actually count their postal votes after they have counted non postal votes.
ReplyDeleteDE PLANO
ReplyDeleteNow that the record is public- I can now tell you what has been hidden from sight with regards to the defences for the Lord Advocate ( Scotgov) and the Advocate General (UK gov) - there are none.
The exact words of Martin Keatings:
"That's right folks - the entirety of the submissions by the UK government, the Lord Advocate (on behalf of the Scottish Parliament) and the Scottish ministers as you will see in the record now published has been to try and have the case dismissed or delayed.
Not one of the defenders has actually advanced any argument whatsoever either for or against our legal opinion that the Scottish parliament can legislate for a second referendum without Westminster consent - Not one of them!
And there's a reason for that. It is de plano (without argument) - they have no argument against our submission that the Scottish Parliament could legislate for a second referendum tomorrow.
The UK Government have focused entirely on the dismissal of the case because a ruling in our favour would mean the whole of Scotland would finally realise that Scotland can have a referendum tomorrow without their permission.
The Scottish Ministers and the Lord Advocate seem to, in my opinion, have pursued the same methodology of trying to have it turned out because god forbid the Scottish Electorate might actually find out that the Scottish Parliament could legislate for a second referendum tomorrow! "
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSSS - his multiple personalities deleting his own posts - sad.
DeleteI had to re-read and still I don't understand your posts.
DeleteAt the moment, Scotland can hold a legal referendum. It doesn't need a court decision for this. It can legislate for a referendum as powerful in law as the EUref.
However, a referendum could be challenged (just like attempts were made for the EUref), which is a worry for the Scottish government. Regarding the current court case; it might rule that in fact they don't have the power, which would remove their current ability to hold a legal iref. That or put conditions on them they didn't want. Weakening their position.
The UK government know that Scotland can hold an iref, but know they also might / maybe be able to challenge it, even if just by technicalities, maybe delaying or forcing a re-run. The threat of that is good for them, and the longer they go without a decision on whether it could be challenged or not the better. Because, of course, the current court case might go against them.
So it is neither government's interests that this case go ahead.
This is obvious. Only an idiot would take such a gamble and go to court with this if they don't need to.
Why on earth put iref2 at risk like this? It's only unionists saying we need permission, and going to court is agreeing with unionists that maybe we do.
It's our f'n country. We don't have to ask the courts if we can have a referendum. This is unionist talk; playing into Westminster's hands.
DeleteHowever, at the same time, it makes sense to see if we can get the main antagonist to sign a bit of paper saying they will not try to challenge the vote / result.
An S30 like getting your neigbour to agree on your extension plans before you go ahead with the submission to the council (of Europe, the World etc). You can proceed with your plans without that agreement, but they might chose to oppose your plans and that could cause you problems.
This is where we are. Scottish government can hold a ref, London is saying it might challenge it. Neither wants things challenged as it could weaken them.
SSS says - "I had to re- read and still I don't understand your posts" well with your multiple personalities I am sure that is a common occurrence and probably the explanation of why you really really are not a good reader.
DeleteOne personality posts at 12.02 and another comes along not to delete the 12.02 post but add their own at 12.10. Sad.
No, I wrote a post, then decided to reframe it after re-reading your post, and the story which you seemed to be discussing.
DeleteThis is call editing / revising a post. It's normal for sane people to do this.
It's only conspiracy theory nuts that think Sturgeon is deleting my posts.
SSS - so one of your multiple personalities is Sturgeon - so you have a mix of male and female personalities - wow - and another personality who deletes your posts is sane.
DeleteWell thank goodness for the sane personality that deletes your posts.
Do you think we have to ask permission for the referendum or are you against the court case?
DeleteGeorgia is now starting to slip away from Trump as the votes still be counted are in the main from Atlanta and one other Democratic county. The late John Lewis would be pleased.
ReplyDeletePosted at 17:0717:07
DeleteBREAKING
Biden projected to win Wisconsin
NEW
ReplyDelete@Survation
Poll - Scottish Independence Referendum
“Should Scotland be an independent country?”
Yes 54% (+1)
No 46% (-1)
1,071 respondents, residents of Scotland, aged 16+, fieldwork 28 Oct - 4 Nov 2020. Changes w/ 2-7 Sep 2020
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete–Scottish Parliament Constituency vote
ReplyDeleteSNP 54% (+1)
CON 19% (-1)
LAB 18% (-)
LD 7% (+1)
OTH 2% (-1)
Regional List vote
SNP 43% (+2)
LAB 19% (+1)
CON 17% (-1)
GRN 10% (-)
LD 7% (-1)
BXP 2% (-)
UKIP 1% (-)
OTH 1% (-)
Scotland Westminster Voting Intention:
SNP 52% (+1)
LAB 20% (-1)
CON 18% (-2)
LD 8% (+2)
OTH 2% (-)
ISP less than 1% again.
DeleteUnionists need a new approach to #Salmondtransgate
This American election is a farce .Can you imagine the last UK election and let's say Moray constiencey and they were still counting on the Saturday and then some one said another 6k votes have been dumped from Elgin.
ReplyDeleteThis is going to end in violence Trumpets think they have been cheated and some of his supporters are armed to the teeth with all sorts of guns grenade launchers etc .Scary stuff .
This has made me start to think that the FM is right to go try everything to obtain a sect 30 .We want our Referendum to beyond reproach we don't want Unionists to hold a grievance and feel cheated .Such divisions can last for generations .Look at Ireland people still vote for Fianna Fail or Fianna Gael on the basis what side there family fought on in the Irish civil war .
A fair and open referendum will help heal division and help to ensure that we all move forward together in an Independent Scotland
These numbers are somewhat at odds with our resident unionist armchair expert predictions from three weeks ago.
ReplyDeleteI’ve included (changes since then), which were emerging in the data at the time, but some could not see it.
Coronavirus (COVID-19): modelling the epidemic in Scotland (Issue No. 25)
- R = 0.9(-0.4) to 1.1 (-0.5)
- Growth rate = -1(-7)% to +2(-7)%.
- Doubling time = >45 (+37) days