Trump vs Harris

There's £2.5 million requesting 1.7 Donald Trump at Betfair Exchange.

I remain of the view the opinion polls are more likely than not to underestimate his vote for the third Election running.

I also still think that Democrats endlessly labelling anyone who votes for Trump a "moron" is about as likely to be as successful a ploy as Remainers labelling Leave voters "morons" proved (not) to be in the Brexit vote over here.

Successful political campaigning is about persuasion, not abuse or hectoring and a lot of Democrats seem to have forgotten that with their relentless tidal wave of "if you've got a brain...." or even "if you're a real man...." you'll vote for Kamala.
 
Last edited:
Final
@EmersonPolling
/
@thehill
Senate poll:

ARIZONA
Gallego (D) 50% (+5)
Lake (R) 45%
.
PENNSYLVANIA
Casey (D-Inc) 47%
McCormick (R) 47%
.
WISCONSIN
Baldwin (D-Inc) 51% (+6)
Hovde (R) 45%
.
NEVADA
Rosen (D-Inc) 50% (+6)
Brown (R) 44%
.
MICHIGAN
Slotkin (D) 49% (+4)
Rogers (R) 45%

LV, 10/30-11/2
 
Ian_Davies said:
There's £2.5 million requesting 1.7 Donald Trump at Betfair Exchange.
Click to expand...
It's still there this morning, assuming it's the same 2mil

I'm with the 'shy republican' theory too, unfortunately

First State polls to close are Indiana and Kentucky around 10pm our time, with several more including the 'swing states' of Georgia and North Carolina around midnight

I'll hang around for them, then a good few hours beddy-byes in preparation for the fallout on Wednesday

"if you're a real man...." you'll read poetry, listen to string quartets and watch National Hunt racing
 
538 calls it a statistical dead-heat.
Silver calls it Trump.
Lichtman calls it Harris.

I'm not calling it but agree with Seth Myers.

 
I have yet to meet anyone who made their political betting pay by allowing their own political beliefs to influence their judgement.

Backing who you want to win, as opposed to who logically should win, or is value at the odds, is the road to ruin.

This isn't directed at any individual - it's just an observation that has stood the test of time.
 
Ian_Davies said:
I have yet to meet anyone who made their political betting pay by allowing their own political beliefs to influence their judgement.

Backing who you want to win, as opposed to who logically should win, or is value at the odds, is the road to ruin.

This isn't directed at any individual - it's just an observation that has stood the test of time.
Click to expand...
100% correct.
 
I wouldn’t want to make money on anything that could make the world a worse and more dangerous place. I can’t watch the news: every time I turn it on I see and hear that vile man spewing out his rabid divisive comments.
 
If the rapist wins, which now looks likely, I hope his rapist supporters don't mind looking in the mirror and know they supported a rapist. Sane people can only hope the rapist loses. We live in dark times when a rapists runs the USA
 
Last edited:
I hate both parties,at least i made some money on Michigan i hope..19% out that expert in Ohio was obviously it was just Democrat propangada..i will never listen to anything by goverments polls after what ive seen and the lying about enabling a genocide by these people,disgusting..
 
Last edited:
Ian_Davies said:
You don't change people's minds by telling them they're stupid for holding their current view.

In Britain we've had years of the self-appointed intellectual elite saying anyone who wants Brexit must be a moron and it didn't stop the Leave vote winning or subsequent ratifications of that view via Euro Elections and the 2019 "Get Brexit Done" General Election.

And I say that as someone who voted Remain and would vote to Rejoin.

Regardless of what anyone thinks personally about the politics of it all, people are entitled to vote for whoever or whatever they like and all constant ridiculing of them does is drive support underground so it doesn't show up as much in opinion polls but still shows up in the actual vote.

I'll go as far to say I can't have Trump beat now - he's home and hosed.
Click to expand...
As with all such threads, two entirely separate debates have run in parallel on this one.

The debate about who OUGHT (based on political beliefs, morality etc) to win and who WILL (the betting angle) win.

Watching the whole thing unfold on social media - so important nowadays - it reminded me so much of Brexit.

Intellectually snobbish Remainers preached to the converted, derided Leave voters as fools - and lost.

Here I've seen Democrats - Michelle Obama a particular culprit - slating not just Donald Trump but anyone who was thinking of voting for him.

You really don't win hearts and minds that way - in many senses this Election marked the limitations of a particular brand of strident, hectoring feminism.

Equality? Absolutely.

But actually thinking you can stridently hector millions of men into doing your bidding with all that "if you're a real man...." malarkey?

I don't think so - in fact I know so.

Milions upon millions of young male Americans have basically told Obama she can go and F herself because they couldn't begin to care whether she and her condescending husband think they are real men or not.

I feel a bit sorry for Kamala Harris, because she has been a bit subtler and more nuanced.

But the message was still essentially the same.

Briefly tuned in just now and had to laugh at how far the media are behind on it all still - Trump is No Offers on Betfair and the BBC are still saying it's too early call it.

Well, I'll call it - Trump wins.
 
Last edited:
says a lot if they're the best either side have to offer, both have major 'flaws'

who ought to win, matter of opinion, but like here and other countries some will only vote right or left regardless of candidate and that's just how it is and bitching about it ain't going to change it

Imo people tend to vote on the handful of issues that matter most to them personally.

lefties hectoring the other side only ever means heels are dug in and they still haven't learned yet

it's not mathematically impossible for Kamala to win given the votes still to be counted but unlikely

seen as presiding over an open border allowing millions of illegals into the usa was never going to do her any favours, nor the word salad responses combined with a mad cackle.

Trump going on Joe Rogan to talk sh&te for a few hours and Kamala refusing except on her terms will have helped him given how many millions watched it live and afterwards
 
Last edited:
LUKE said:
As I see it -8weeks to election day -Trump avoids another debate at all costs and gets down to what he is Good at -negative campaigning.It will be like Hardy Eustace v Harchibald up the hill at Cheltenham.
Click to expand...
This.
 
EC21 said:
If the rapist wins, which now looks likely, I hope his rapist supporters don't mind looking in the mirror and know they supported a rapist. Sane people can only hope the rapist loses. We live in dark times when a rapists runs the USA
Click to expand...
30 years ago some slut decides to go into a changing room alone with a man out of the public eye...He becomes a target for every dem out there and she decides to come forward and get her pennies worth. Trump simply states "It's a made up fabricated story by someone looking to promote a book." Maybe it was maybe it wasn't but how would we ever know for sure For someone who was molested she seem to be well over it when boasting about what she was going to but with Trumps money.......if it had been the only attack on Trump we may have believed it but it is one of dozens like the 34 felonies the raid on his home the Russia Hoax........fuck he complimented a young 10 year old girl and the sick fuckers even used her to call him a perv.............The killers allowed million of illegals into the country which led to murders and rapes to try and get extra votes,,the latest was a 5 year old raped by 2 gang members who had previously offended in their own country.......and you think people should vote for the fuckers who allowed them into the country. By the way the average payout when a case goes to trial is $217,000 not $83m. There should be a law saying any claim after 3 or 4 years shall be restricted to $217,000 and see how amny will come forward after 20 plus years
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
If the betting markets are right it looks over before it starts. Ladbrokes and PP just went 4/9 ..https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-state-betting/nevada https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-state-betting/wisconsin https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-state-betting/pennsylvania https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-state-betting/michigan a sporting bet could be Trump to break the 300 barrier
Click to expand...
Looks like a very good bet as predicted :0)
 
Tanlic said:
30 years ago some slut decides to go into a changing room alone with a man out of the public eye...He becomes a target for every dem out there and she decides to come forward and get her pennies worth. Trump simply states "It's a made up fabricated story by someone looking to promote a book." Maybe it was maybe it wasn't but how would we ever know for sure For someone who was molested she seem to be well over it when boasting about what she was going to but with Trumps money.......if it had been the only attack on Trump we may have believed it but it is one of dozens like the 34 felonies the raid on his home the Russia Hoax........fuck he complimented a young 10 year old girl and the sick fuckers even used her to call him a perv.............The killers allowed million of illegals into the country which led to murders and rapes to try and get extra votes,,the latest was a 5 year old raped by 2 gang members who had previously offended in their own country.......and you think people should vote for the fuckers who allowed them into the country. By the way the average payout when a case goes to trial is $217,000 not $83m. There should be a law saying any claim after 3 or 4 years shall be restricted to $217,000 and see how amny will come forward after 20 plus years
Click to expand...
Yes, the language you use to describe a female enemy of Trump says so much about you, of course.

The bloke is a danger to democracy anyway, but given a mandate that bolsters his own credibility, he will be unstoppable. An ego that size, with few restrictions and great power, presents a great danger to the world.

And, yes, the bloke is a pervert if he's pointing at a 10-year-old, who he doesn't know, and labels her "pretty".
 
I dunno what the world is coming to if you are a perv because you call a little girl pretty. If that's the case then my whole family and most of my friends should be locked up.
 
barjon said:
I dunno what the world is coming to if you are a perv because you call a little girl pretty. If that's the case then my whole family and most of my friends should be locked up.
Click to expand...
If one of my mates was sat round my house, watching the telly, and referred to a 10-year-old girl as pretty, he would, bare minimum, get a funny look. Adult men should not be passing comments on very much younger girls, describing their physical attractiveness, unless they know them. And 10 is probably pushing it.

Family members and mates’ daughters or grand daughters are absolutely fine. There’s an assumed level of consent to pass a compliment in those circumstances.

And, btw, you’d be passing that compliment in full view and earshot of the parents.
 
Last edited:
It's all down to generation/culture/values.

Here's my take - the world doesn't need to know your every thought, and that includes whether you think a random child is "pretty," or not.

Does that mean a child you don't consider pretty is any the lesser as a person for it?

So how about you button it and spare the world your opinion on literally everything?

Just a thought and not directed at any individual.
 
Back
Top