Trump vs Biden 2020, Day 64 of the Pennsylvania count (pt 5) Read OP

BringBackMick

BringBackMick wrote: »

I'm clearing saying that I would add 20% to Trump's current implied chance of a 2nd term (currently 10%) with the soundings out of Washington and New York today and over the last several days.

There is clear momentum building beyond Trump and his legal battle, and once it starts moving and he starts rallying around America, his chance of winning the White House for a 2nd term is going to only increase.

You really would be very gullible to believe this race is over.

Would you like to make a charity bet? I'll even give you those odds that you've plucked out of thin air. I'll donate €80 if Trump stays in office in January, where you donate €30 if he doesn't.

How does that sound?

namloc1980

It's clear what the Trump and Republican strategy is. To create confusion and chaos in the hope that at least a handful of states do not have their results certified by the time the Electoral College meets on the 14th December or that where results are certified Republican legislatures in those states (e.g. Pennsylvania) would send pro-Trump Electors forward even if Biden won the vote in the state. Absolute banana republic stuff but this is where they are going. Especially as the lawsuits appear to be spurious at best.

lemonTrees

BringBackMick wrote: »

For all those laughing at my posts.

I think any fair minded analyst will understand that this election is not sealed.

People are getting hysterical on both sides.

All I am saying is that from my soundings from colleagues in Washington, viewing market trends and reading various analysis there is around 30% chance of Trump being returned to office for a 2nd term.

This might be unsettling for some of you, but it is the truth.

Quality postings. You are a breath of fresh air on this thread.

storker

BringBackMick wrote: »

There is clear momentum building beyond Trump and his legal battle, and once it starts moving and he starts rallying around America, his chance of winning the White House for a 2nd term is going to only increase.

What does this momentum consist of, exactly? Even Fox cut away from the latest press conference that was claiming the election was rigged.

lemonTrees

lemonTrees wrote: »

Quality postings. You are a breath of fresh air on this thread.

I was sure that this was a sarcastic reply, but then I realised that you thanked the post. :pac:

Graham

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

What difference is Trump rallying around America going to make to the election result?

None at all but it will keep Trump's ego fed for a day or two.

ohnonotgmail

Graham wrote: »

None at all but it will keep Trump's ego fed for a day or two.

It will also keep the benjamins coming in.

namloc1980

storker wrote: »

What does this momentum consist of, exactly? Even Fox cut away from the latest press conference that was claiming the election was rigged.

The only momentum that there is in the legal challenges (which are a load of nonsense) is to cause delays and prevent the official certification of the results in a number of key states so that when the EC meets on 14th December there would not be enough votes for either Biden or Trump.

BringBackMick

robinph wrote: »

He would need to somehow have the results of 5 separate state-wide elections reversed from their current predicted results for that to happen.

There is zero chance that a recount is going to find another 10's of thousands of votes for Trump in each of those 5 states.
There is zero chance that they have any evidence of 10's of thousands of fake ballots being made in each of those five states.
There is zero chance that they will be able to show the republican organisation in control of multiple of the states did something illegal in the way that each of those states, or even the democrat controlled ones.
There is zero chance of a re-election being carried out before December 13th(?) in any or all of those states.

On December 13th(?) every state has to submit their results and EC votes, that date will not change (although I may have the wrong date).
In the beginning of January the EC votes are confirmed. That date will not change.
At midday on 20th January Trump will cease to be president. That will not change.

It is more likely that Pelosi would be inaugurated rather than Trump on the 20th January, or Harris in the event that the result of the EC doesn't change but Biden gets run over by a bus before then.

Trump just needs to convince the courts that the occurrence of fraud in mail-in ballots has been huge and he can totally discredit the election and the electoral process. If this is upheld, there could either be a re-election or a significant portion of mail-in ballots could be binned.

This is just one angle- the Trump campaign have many other cases.

People seem to forget that Biden is only marginally ahead in important states that were called for him by the networks.

Michigan and Wisconsin could yet be flipped if a portion of mail-in ballots are voided.

Smee_Again

robinph wrote: »

He would need to somehow have the results of 5 separate state-wide elections reversed from their current predicted results for that to happen.

There is zero chance that a recount is going to find another 10's of thousands of votes for Trump in each of those 5 states.
There is zero chance that they have any evidence of 10's of thousands of fake ballots being made in each of those five states.
There is zero chance that they will be able to show the republican organisation in control of multiple of the states did something illegal in the way that each of those states, or even the democrat controlled ones.
There is zero chance of a re-election being carried out before December 13th(?) in any or all of those states.

On December 13th(?) every state has to submit their results and EC votes, that date will not change (although I may have the wrong date).
In the beginning of January the EC votes are confirmed. That date will not change.
At midday on 20th January Trump will cease to be president. That will not change.

It is more likely that Pelosi would be inaugurated rather than Trump on the 20th January, or Harris in the event that the result of the EC doesn't change but Biden gets run over by a bus before then.

I think its doubtful there'll even be a recount in Wisconsin, the 2016 recount cost $2M and there's no way Trump is going to pay that (and I think it's a $3.5M deposit that needs to be paid).

Doctor Jimbob

BringBackMick wrote: »

Trump just needs to convince the courts that the occurrence of fraud in mail-in ballots has been huge and he can totally discredit the election and the electoral process. If this is upheld, there could either be a re-election or a significant portion of mail-in ballots could be binned.

This is just one angle- the Trump campaign have many other cases.

People seem to forget that Biden is only marginally ahead in important states that were called for him by the networks.

Michigan and Wisconsin could yet be flipped if a portion of mail-in ballots are voided.

All that would be a fair point if Trump had the slightest shred of evidence to back up his claims of fraud.

Thankfully, he doesn't have that, so it's not happening.

Padre_Pio

BringBackMick wrote: »

Trump just needs to convince the courts that the occurrence of fraud in mail-in ballots has been huge and he can totally discredit the election and the electoral process. If this is upheld, there could either be a re-election or a significant portion of mail-in ballots could be binned.

This is just one angle- the Trump campaign have many other cases.

People seem to forget that Biden is only marginally ahead in important states that were called for him by the networks.

Michigan and Wisconsin could yet be flipped if a portion of mail-in ballots are voided.

How though??

How could he convince the courts that the presidential election ballots are fraudulent, while the senate election is accurate?

What evidence is there that Biden is so significantly up compared to previous democratic candidates?

Why are mail in ballots fraudulent in this election but never before?

BringBackMick

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you like to make a charity bet? I'll even give you those odds that you've plucked out of thin air. I'll donate €80 if Trump stays in office in January, where you donate €30 if he doesn't.

How does that sound?

I don't know who will end being the next President.

What I am saying is this is not over yet, and nowhere near over.

Networks should not have called this for Biden and western powers should not have sent their congratulations due to a call by media networks.

This election has a way to go yet and I am putting Trump's chances of getting a 2nd term around 30%.

Tony EH

Wibbs wrote: »

It really depends on whose viewpoint you take L, and whose propaganda from the time too. For example Kennedy didn't stare across at the Russians and wait for them to blink(that famous quote came out long after the Soviets had turned back). How that crisis was averted was through behind closed doors back and forth between the two powers(which led to the direct Moscow/Washington line being set up). Indeed the Cuban missiles were removed only on the proviso that the US missiles in Turkey were also removed(that only came out years later) and that the US administration would publicly state they wouldn't invade Cuba in the future.

If anything it can be argued quite easily that while it was a "win" in the western mind for the US, it was actually Khrushchev that gambled and won that crisis for his country. If he hadn't sent missiles steaming across the Atlantic chances are that the Americans would have had another go at Cuba(which really irritated them and not just because of "commies", lots of vested interests were making big money from Cuba and the Cubans) and their missile bases in Turkey would have been still active and reinforced. Apparently "our" side's missiles within striking distance of "theirs" is OK, but not so much the other way around.

What is really the takeaway from things like this is how spin is spun and who's doing the spinning and that usually only comes out decades later, if it comes out at all. Now personally I consider trump to be a dangerously divisive muppet of the highest calibre in the highest post of a dangerously divided land, but to many Americans who saw their paychecks and jobs and investments rise during his tenure they may see things differently. Clearly 70 million of them did to some degree and that support base and all that came and comes with it hasn't gone away.

While the above it true, you could probably wipe out a considerable percentage of that 70 million by eliminating the "I vote for Team B no matter what crowd", who couldn't care less about Trump and simply don't want a Democrat in the White House.

Koko the gorilla could be the Republican ticket and she'd get a decent number going for her. I would suggest that the actual number who are voting for Trump, because it's Trump, wouldn't be as high as 70 mil.

It would still be in the millions, though...which is a different worry altogether.

listermint

BringBackMick wrote: »

Trump just needs to convince the courts that the occurrence of fraud in mail-in ballots has been huge and he can totally discredit the election and the electoral process. If this is upheld, there could either be a re-election or a significant portion of mail-in ballots could be binned.

This is just one angle- the Trump campaign have many other cases.

People seem to forget that Biden is only marginally ahead in important states that were called for him by the networks.

Michigan and Wisconsin could yet be flipped if a portion of mail-in ballots are voided.

So many many colleagues, the best colleagues, the finest colleagues. My colleagues grow depending on the state I need to talk about

BringBackMick

BringBackMick wrote: »

Trump just needs to convince the courts that the occurrence of fraud in mail-in ballots has been huge and he can totally discredit the election and the electoral process. If this is upheld, there could either be a re-election or a significant portion of mail-in ballots could be binned.

I don't think you understand what this word means. The only evidence of "fraud" we have found in the entire election is republicans placing misleading ballot boxes in California.

BringBackMick wrote: »

This is just one angle- the Trump campaign have many other cases.

Yes, they have many cases for Trump to pack his clothes and belongings into in January.

BringBackMick wrote: »

People seem to forget that Biden is only marginally ahead in important states that were called for him by the networks.

The only state he is marginally ahead in is Georgia. No other state can or will be flipped for any reason.

BringBackMick wrote: »

Michigan and Wisconsin could yet be flipped if a portion of mail-in ballots are voided.

Any state could be flipped either way if fabrications are made. What's your point?

bocaman

If this happened in Belarus for example we'd be saying what a terrible place. A sitting president beaten in a fair election refuses to accept the result and vacate power. He then launches a bid to overthrow the democratic result and claim victory. This could turn very nasty.

Movementarian

BringBackMick wrote: »

I don't know who will end being the next President.

What I am saying is this is not over yet, and nowhere near over.

Networks should not have called this for Biden and western powers should not have sent their congratulations due to a call by media networks.

This election has a way to go yet and I am putting Trump's chances of getting a 2nd term around 30%.

You and your "colleagues" in "Washington" sound awfully vague and you haven't mentioned one concrete basis for anything you are saying. So when you say you are putting "chances" at 30% it is meaningless.

Other people have come back to you with factual messages such as large voting margin gaps in over 5 states that Biden is winning or has won. You just say things like "Oh that can be overturned"...how? You don't say. Why? You don't say.

But somehow these mystical "markets" you keep quoting are giving Trump chances, but the bookies have paid out on a Biden win. Markets don't bet on your feelings or random musings.

km991148

bocaman wrote: »

If this happened in Belarus for example we'd be saying what a terrible place. A sitting president beaten in a fair election refuses to accept the result and vacate power. He then launches a bid to overthrow the democratic result and claim victory. This could turn very nasty.

It's happening in America tho, and I still say it's a terrible place.

BringBackMick

BringBackMick wrote: »

I don't know who will end being the next President.

Yes you do.

BringBackMick wrote: »

What I am saying is this is not over yet, and nowhere near over.

Yes it is over, for the same reason all previous presidential elections were considered over.

BringBackMick wrote: »

Networks should not have called this for Biden and western powers should not have sent their congratulations due to a call by media networks.

Yes they should have. He comfortably has won the required number of electoral votes.

BringBackMick wrote: »

This election has a way to go yet and I am putting Trump's chances of getting a 2nd term around 30%.

Then why not take the charity bet? I'll give you even better odds if you wish. I'll donate €200 to charity and you donate €20. A charity will benefit either way, what's the harm? If you don't like betting of course, that's fine, not trying to bait you into it.

km991148

Movementarian wrote: »

You and your "colleagues" in "Washington" sound awfully vague and you haven't mentioned one concrete basis for anything you are saying. So when you say you are putting "chances" at 30% it is meaningless.

Other people have come back to you with factual messages such as large voting margin gaps in over 5 states that Biden is winning or has won. You just say things like "Oh that can be overturned"...how? You don't say. Why? You don't say.

But somehow these mystical "markets" you keep quoting are giving Trump chances, but the bookies have paid out on a Biden win. Markets don't bet on your feelings or random musings.

Yes, I think 30% is over egging it tbh.

The liquidity still holds around 10 (up from 7 last night). I still think that is too high. A few percentage points of absolute zealotry.

For Forks Sake

John Olivers summation of the past week

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyC855KdBKo

extra gravy

One of the funniest parts of all this is the Trumpsters suddening whinging about CNN et al "calling it" when they had no issues with them calling it when Trump was elected. They seem to think the networks just decide to call it when they feel like it, unaware that there's teams of statisticians running the numbers who won't call it until it's mathematically impossible for the leading candidate to be caught. The reality is that it was the American people that actually called it by voting. Blaming the "msm" is just another one of the lies fed to them by their liar-in-chief.

Leroy42

BringBackMick wrote: »

I don't know who will end being the next President.

What I am saying is this is not over yet, and nowhere near over.

Networks should not have called this for Biden and western powers should not have sent their congratulations due to a call by media networks.

This election has a way to go yet and I am putting Trump's chances of getting a 2nd term around 30%.

The networks have done exactly the same as they have for years, in fact exactly as they did when Trump was announced the winner, even before he got to 270.

Why is this year different? The only difference is that Trump is claiming the vote is rigged. Nothing else has changed.

Networks called it for Biden because that is what the counted votes are saying. Are you really saying that the Networks should not have any comment until every and all legal cases have been adjudicated? The assumption is, and must be that the systems in place are robust enough to ensure a free and fair election, and that results are reliable.

Foreign leaders, of course, congratulate Biden, as has any normal American that in't intent on blowing up democracy for their own sake.

But 30% chance means that 70% chance is that Biden will remain the POTUS-Elect. Not is not particularly good odds for Trump, given that he has been crowing out rigged elections and fraud for months.

Also, we know that Trump said he wouldn't accept the election result, or have a transition, unless he won. So he is not doing anything that he hadn't said he wouldn't. SO they claim he is doing it because of he uncovered fraud doesn't even stand up. He is doing it because he was always going to do it.

DrumSteve

extra gravy wrote: »

One of the funniest parts of all this is the Trumpsters suddening whinging about CNN et al "calling it" when they bad no issues with them calling it when Trump was elected. They seem to think the networks just decide to call it when they feel like it, unaware that there's teams of statisticians running the numbers who won't call it until it's mathematically impossible for the leading candidate to be caught. The reality is that it was the American people that actually called it by voting. Blaming the "msm" is just another one of the lies fed to them by their liar-in-chief.

Its funny also how they discount fox news as not being part of the MSM.

briany

I mean, of course mail-in voting fraud has been totally huge.

I mean it's obviously been totally huge.

How do I know? Oh, I know.

I know.

Of course the librul media is against Trump. And of course the Dem courts are going to rule against him.

What do you mean provide evidence? I present to you video of a Trump rally vs. a Biden rally. Case closed, your honour.

Question everything, everybody, except those facts which come from Trump.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

DrumSteve wrote: »

Its funny also how they discount fox news as not being part of the MSM.

I know, right? The neck of them. Fox is as mainstream as it gets.

thecretinhop

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/09/ex-michigan-deputy-attorney-general-alleges-detroit-counters-assigned-fraudulent-ballots-to-non-voters/

time to get de popcorn out

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I posted the following cartoon on my (locked down) Facebook a few days ago. It’s been flagged as false information. I didn’t add a caption. It’s a cartoon! And clearly a joke! Alarming.

briany

briany wrote: »

I mean, of course mail-in voting fraud has been totally huge.

I mean it's obviously been totally huge.

How do I know? Oh, I know.

I know.

Welp, you've convinced me.

(I know you were being sarcastic by the by. )