O/T:- Betting odds for US Election [The USA Politics Thread]

[the_anticlough]

Yeah, there seems to be a major shift in recent years. The Democrats are now the party of the wealthy

I'll give you things have shifted but I don't believe that. We have to be clear what the establishment is, and always has been - it's the economic elite, the corporation owners, and it's extension to politics and media, which it controls by buying. The people at the top of business, politics, media generally share the same background and culture.

This is how I read the pretty poor options available to the US electorate, in really crude terms

Harris - 'I will not threaten your wealth and power dear billionaires, but can't we please keep things sweet by not distributing away from the middle class and poor anymore than we've done already'

Trump - 'Let's go for it, Truss style, and see how far we can cut tax and redistribute wealth even further in favour of the billionnaires. Undermine labour as much as possible and create Latin American style or pre-New Deal levels of inequality'

They're both the party of the wealthy - would the establishment allow either of the two main options to actually threaten their position? Of course not. But the Republican as ever are the ones to be be aggressively engaging in class war to bring about a further major shift in favour of the ruling class.

[Lullapie]

I heard an interview with Vivek Ramaswamy recently where he explained that those voting for Harris are voting for a machine. The machine has chosen her as the figurehead, but the actual running of the country will continue in spite of her if she wins, just as it has in spite of Biden. That sounds about right to me. For anyone who disagrees, do you really think a senile old man who couldn't hold down a job in Lidl is running the world's most powerful country?

The Democrats, as you say, are the establishment party now.

100% - great post.

[Lullapie]

I'll give you things have shifted but I don't believe that. We have to be clear what the establishment is, and always has been - it's the economic elite, the corporation owners, and it's extension to politics and media, which it controls by buying. The people at the top of business, politics, media generally share the same background and culture.

This is how I read the pretty poor options available to the US electorate, in really crude terms

Harris - 'I will not threaten your wealth and power dear billionaires, but can't we please keep things sweet by not distributing away from the middle class and poor anymore than we've done already'

Trump - 'Let's go for it, Truss style, and see how far we can cut tax and redistribute wealth even further in favour of the billionnaires. Undermine labour as much as possible and create Latin American style or pre-New Deal levels of inequality'

They're both the party of the wealthy - would the establishment allow either of the two main options to actually threaten their position? Of course not. But the Republican as ever are the ones to be be aggressively engaging in class war to bring about a further major shift in favour of the ruling class.

I agree that we don't really know what the establishment is.

What I would say, is that if you do a general internet search for Donald Trump, nearly every article that appears is anti-Trump. This leads to the opinion that he is hated by everybody. However, he will win the US Election - I personally don't believe it was ever in doubt, even after Biden was replaced with Harris.

In reality, many social commentators and some of the media are very pro-Trump. Some highly intelligent people are Trump supporters - but this wouldn't suit the rhetoric of the establishment who feed the story 'to the peasants' that all Trump supporters are redneck fascists and white males from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

Cutting taxes to business is good economics. People forget that businesses employ people. Normal people (if you call business owners rich prick$ who exploit the workers). As I've said before, taxation is regressive. We're brainwashed into thinking that people who get on in life should be taxed more heavily. Punishing the pack leaders doesn't happen in any form of nature so why should it work with the human race?
Taxation is the redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich, not the other way around. Do you feel richer now than before Covid? I certainly don't. I feel much worse off, but the pharmaceutical companies and other massive corporates have done very well thank you.

I would fight my case with anyone who tries to say that taxing people more is the way to go. To me it sounds like economics of envy.

[Lullapie]

I watched Vivek Rawaswamy on Lex Fridman and he strikes me as certainly decent in the sense of very bright and articulate. I think he comes across well on a lot of issues, he explains his views on immigration very well. I think he is wrong to the point of being deluded on Ukraine and I'm concerned by how he can't bring himself to criticise Trump's fake elector scheme, which is worrying but I suppose that's politics. We are one month out from an election after all and he doesn't want those headlines.

RFK comes across more as eccentric uncle than presidential material to me.

Musk is loved by many but big question marks overbhis judgement for me. He's a great hype and ideas man but out of all his companies I think only SpaceX is well run. His audit of the public seccltor would probably start with the removal of any oversight and regulation of social media, self driving electric vehicles and satellites (while keeping the billion dollar government subsidies he's supposedly against). But maybe I'm being cynical.

Some very good points .

With regards to Russia and the Ukraine, has anyone noticed how the mainstream media are now quoting Putin saying that he wouldn't be keen on Trump as President? They're using Putin's quotes to promote Kamala Harris - why is no one questioning the fact that the man that the media has attacked over his invasion of Ukraine for so long, is now worthy of his advice in the US Election - is it because the media is desperate to keep Trump out at all costs?

Just one example below from the 'how establishment do you want to get - BBC?'

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g95r3lnr2o



When we came to New Zealand, we were told that because of the size of the country and population it was often used as a 'testing ground' for new products.

Many here felt that we were used as a testing ground for a new style of social control under the Ardern government. The media here played a massive role in getting her into power and keeping her there. It was only when social unrest kicked off that the media wound it back a bit.

With a new government in place, the NZ media is still ploughing it's Ardernist agenda, but the new government is no longer bankrolling the NZ media. This has meant that many NZ media outlets are falling over. We aren't far away from having no 6 o'clock news on ANY channel. This is down to the fact that most of the NZ public no longer trust what they are told (it started during the Ardern years).

Do people not realise that this is what could be about to happen in the US? How many billionaires are media magnates, but anti-Trump?

[the_anticlough]

I agree that we don't really know what the establishment is.
.

Not what I said, which was

We have to be clear what the establishment is, and always has been - it's the economic elite, the corporation owners, and it's extension to politics and media, which it controls by buying. The people at the top of business, politics, media generally share the same background and culture.

Which doesn't always mean it'll be united behind one political project (think Brexit), but we know that Trump's is the Truss agenda economically.

One thing nailed on in the upcoming election is that Harris will win the popular vote, probably by a similar 7 million voter margin that Biden beat Trump.

The election has been reduced to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona and a few other swing states that's why they're practically the only places they're campaigning in.

[slack_pie]

I'll give you things have shifted but I don't believe that. We have to be clear what the establishment is, and always has been - it's the economic elite, the corporation owners, and it's extension to politics and media, which it controls by buying. The people at the top of business, politics, media generally share the same background and culture.

This is how I read the pretty poor options available to the US electorate, in really crude terms

Harris - 'I will not threaten your wealth and power dear billionaires, but can't we please keep things sweet by not distributing away from the middle class and poor anymore than we've done already'

Trump - 'Let's go for it, Truss style, and see how far we can cut tax and redistribute wealth even further in favour of the billionnaires. Undermine labour as much as possible and create Latin American style or pre-New Deal levels of inequality'

They're both the party of the wealthy - would the establishment allow either of the two main options to actually threaten their position? Of course not. But the Republican as ever are the ones to be be aggressively engaging in class war to bring about a further major shift in favour of the ruling class.

I'm not sure I agree. First, the Dems are the party of the wealthy in terms of the electorate. Biden voters accounted for 70% of the US's wealth.

In terms of the major forces behind each party, it seems pretty clear to me that most of the mainstream media, virtually all educational institutions, Hollywood, and the majority of the Silicon Valley tech and VC sector are behind Harris. The Harris campaign has massively outspent the Trump one, thanks mainly to some truly dreadful advertising.

Wall Street and legacy finance maybe less so, for obvious reasons, but I couldn't be sure either way. Blackrock, the world's largest asset manager, have been fundamental in driving ESG and DEI initiatives across corporate America, so you'd think a Harris administration would be more aligned with all that stuff.

I agree to some extent that both parties represent the establishment to some extent. A genuine anti-establishment candidate wouldn't be allowed to make it this far. But from what I can see, Harris is the favoured choice by the "powers that be".

[SmiffyPie]

Any suggestion that Putin is now anti-Trump and pro-Harris is merely a ploy to try and remove any issue potential Trump voters may have about the Trump/Putin/Ukraine scenario. Putin/Harris is a false political move and nothing more.

[Lullapie]

Not what I said, which was

We have to be clear what the establishment is, and always has been - it's the economic elite, the corporation owners, and it's extension to politics and media, which it controls by buying. The people at the top of business, politics, media generally share the same background and culture.

Which doesn't always mean it'll be united behind one political project (think Brexit), but we know that Trump's is the Truss agenda economically.

One thing nailed on in the upcoming election is that Harris will win the popular vote, probably by a similar 7 million voter margin that Biden beat Trump.

The election has been reduced to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona and a few other swing states that's why they're practically the only places they're campaigning in.

This election hasn't been reduced to anything. The 'swing states' have always held the balance of power in US Politics.

The 'popular vote' means nothing, just as it means nothing in UK politics or the politics of most western democracies. There was a reason why the founding fathers in the US set up the College Electoral System the way they did in the US Constitution and it was based on maintaining nationwide democracy rather than handing it to a few in highly populated states.

I see today that Jeff Goldberg is spouting his lies again in an attempt to slur the Republican Party. His unsubstantiated claims are being run by America's left wing media as 'fact', as he did with the 'losers and suckers' lie in 2020. Obama was out and about yesterday calling Trump and his followers fascists. Scary times as the Democrats get increasingly desperate.

The early voting reports are showing that all of the US's fascists, misogynists, warmongers, xenophobes, homophobes, ***ist and anti-abortionists are voting already as the Republicans are doing well. The well-meaning, new way, well educated, good intending, climate saving, liberals don't seem to be mobilising as yet and that's scaring the Democrat hierarchy.

Perhaps they'll get out and vote after they've got out of bed or go to the polling stations after they've stopped protesting about something useless cause.

[the_anticlough]

You lost ALL credibility when you started with 'Since' - the rest of your comment was just blah, blah, blah.

How infantile is that?! How old are you actually ?

[the_anticlough]

This election hasn't been reduced to anything. The 'swing states' have always held the balance of power in US Politics.

The 'popular vote' means nothing, just as it means nothing in UK politics or the politics of most western democracies. There was a reason why the founding fathers in the US set up the College Electoral System the way they did in the US Constitution and it was based on maintaining nationwide democracy rather than handing it to a few in highly populated states.

I see today that Jeff Goldberg is spouting his lies again in an attempt to slur the Republican Party. His unsubstantiated claims are being run by America's left wing media as 'fact', as he did with the 'losers and suckers' lie in 2020. Obama was out and about yesterday calling Trump and his followers fascists. Scary times as the Democrats get increasingly desperate.

The early voting reports are showing that all of the US's fascists, misogynists, warmongers, xenophobes, homophobes, ***ist and anti-abortionists are voting already as the Republicans are doing well. The well-meaning, new way, well educated, good intending, climate saving, liberals don't seem to be mobilising as yet and that's scaring the Democrat hierarchy.

Perhaps they'll get out and vote after they've got out of bed or go to the polling stations after they've stopped protesting about something useless cause.

The electoral college system is obviously an undemocratic anachronism, and would be scrapped if it wasn't advantageous for Republicans to keep it in place.

Gore got more votes than Bush, but lost
Clinton got more votes than Trump, but lost

Imagine if that was the other way around, the Republicans would have gone crazy and the system would be history already
(at least Biden's 7million advantage in 2020 was so clear cut than even the electoral college couldn't save for the Reps that time)

Votes should be equal. Some votes being worth more than others due to historical, geographical quirks is indefensible really.
The Senate already provides state representation - the presidency needs to be based on a straight popular vote

And it can't be healthy than the majority of the country is neglected and all campaigning activity converges on such a few 'swing states'. The whole country should be buzzing with activity at these times