US Politics

US corporations gave more than $8m to election deniers’ midterm campaignsBrands such as the Home Depot and Boeing donated to candidates who falsely claimed that Trump won presidency in 2020 Some of the best-known corporations in the US, including AT&T, Boeing, Delta Air Lines and the Home Depot, collectively poured more than $8m into supporting election deniers running for US House and Senate seats in this month’s midterm elections.‘Extremists didn’t make it’: why Republicans flopped in once-red ArizonaRead moreA study by the non-partisan government watchdog organization Accountable.US, based on the latest filings to the Federal Election Commission, reveals the extent to which big corporations were prepared to back Republican nominees despite their open peddling of false claims undermining confidence in democracy. Though many were ultimately unsuccessful in their election bids, the candidates included several prominent advocates of Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen from him.At the top of the list of 20 corporations backing election deniers through their political action committees (Pacs) is a familiar name in the world of rightwing agitating – Koch Industries. According to the Accountable.US review, the Koch energy conglomerate spent $771,000 through its Pac on Republican candidates with a track record of casting doubt on elections.Koch Industries is the second-largest privately owned company in the US. It is notorious for using its largely oil-related profits to push conservative politics in an anti-government, anti-regulatory direction under its owner brothers, Charles Koch and David Koch, the latter of whom died in 2019.Close behind Koch is the American Crystal Sugar Company Pac, which spent $630,000 supporting election deniers running for federal office; the AT&T Inc Employee Federal Pac, which contributed $579,000; and the Home Depot Inc Pac, which gave $578,000. Lower down on the list comes the media giant Comcast Corporation & NBC Universal Pac, which contributed $365,000; and the Delta Air Lines Pac, which gave $278,000.The $8m contributed by the top 20 corporations was just a slice of overall corporate giving to election deniers in the 2022 cycle. An earlier analysis by Accountable.US found that, in total, election deniers benefited to the tune of $65m from corporate interests.The new study suggests that top corporations that chose to use their financial muscle to enhance the chances of election deniers waged a non-too-successful gamble. The Washington Post has chronicled how 244 Republican election deniers ran for congressional seats in the midterms, and, of those, at least 81 were defeated.Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US, said that the fact that election deniers at both the federal and the state level struggled at the polls should make corporations reconsider their strategies. Backing candidates who advanced conspiracy theories harmful to democracy could damage their public reputations.“Voters’ rejection of numerous election objectors at the polls should send a clear message to corporations that prioritizing political influence over a healthy democracy could threaten their own bottom line,” Herrig said.The Guardian reached out to several of the top 20 corporate donors for their response. The Home Depot said that its associate-funded Pac supports candidates “on both sides of the aisle who champion pro-business, pro-retail positions that create jobs and economic growth”.AT&T and Delta did not immediately reply. The decision to support election-denier candidates stands in contrast with the strong public stance initially taken by several of the corporations in the wake of the 6 January 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol. Boeing released a statement days after the insurrection in which it said it “strongly condemns the violence, lawlessness and destruction that took place in the US Capitol”. In the 2022 cycle the Boeing Company Pac contributed $418,000 to support Republican candidates who had been vocal in forwarding lies questioning the validity of the 2020 presidential election.Boeing declined to comment.Among the individual candidates whose bid for federal office was supported by top corporations was Derrick Van Orden, who won a close race to represent a swing district in Wisconsin with backing from Koch Industries. Van Orden, a former Navy Seal, was inside the Capitol grounds on January 6.Scott Perry received support from the Kochs, AT&T, Boeing and other corporations in his successful campaign to hold onto his House seat in Pennsylvania. Perry was deeply involved in attempts to block Biden’s victory in 2020, and in the weeks after January 6 sought a presidential pardon from Trump.TopicsUS midterm elections 2022The fight for democracyUS political financingDonald TrumpRepublicansUS politicsKoch brothersAT&TnewsReuse this content More

More ways to listen

Apple Podcasts

Google Podcasts

Spotify

RSS Feed

Download

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share via Email

Florida governor Ron DeSantis passionately praised the former president – now he is being talked about as a possible presidential candidate himself.

How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

When he was first running for governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis was fulsome in his admiration for Donald Trump. The Yale-educated, Catholic family man may have a very different background to the glamour-loving businessman, but politically they soon became entwined. But as Trump’s star has waned, DeSantis has shone brighter. In the midterms, Trump-backed candidates performed poorly, while DeSantis won a resounding victory to become re-elected governor of Florida with his focus on culture war issues. Yet as DeSantis has grown in political popularity, relations between him and Trump have cooled. Now many are talking of DeSantis as a potential Republican candidate for the presidential elections in 2024 – just as Trump announced his own bid. Is DeSantis ready to take on his former idol – and, if he does, what could a bitter battle between the two Republicans mean for the party and US politics? More

Herschel Walker accuser comes forward with fresh relationship claimsWoman who says she was pressured into abortion by Republican Senate hopeful presents unseen letters, audio and diary entries The second woman to allege that she was pressured into having an abortion by Herschel Walker, the Republican nominee in Georgia’s hotly contested US Senate race, on Tuesday presented previously unseen letters, audio recordings and pages of her personal diary that she said were evidence of their relationship, which he has denied.US supreme court allows Congress to view Trump’s tax returnsRead moreAt a press conference in Los Angeles organized by her lawyer, Gloria Allred, the anonymous woman known only as Jane Doe came forward anew with a raft of fresh materials. She said she was doing so because when she first aired her allegations last month “and told the truth, he denied that he knew that I existed”.The alleged new evidence of the relationship between the woman and the former college football star included a voicemail recording in which Walker was purported to say to her: “This is your stud farm calling, you big sex puppy you”.Jane Doe also read out a letter which she said had been written by Walker to her parents. “I do love your daughter and I’m not out to hurt her. She has been a strong backbone for me through all of this,” the letter said.The new allegations surfaced just as early voting is set to begin in the important run-off election for a Georgia seat in the US Senate between Walker, who has publicly called for abortion to be banned, and the Democratic incumbent, Raphael Warnock, following a neck-and-neck result in the midterm elections. Asked whether she was coming forward with a new round of allegations in order to influence the election, Jane Doe said: “Voters can make their own decision. All I can do is tell the truth.”The unnamed woman initially raised her claims on 26 October that she was pressured into an abortion. She alleged that she had an intimate relationship with Walker for six years while he was playing for the Dallas Cowboys and that he paid for her to have an abortion in 1993, driving her to the clinic.Walker rebutted the claims, saying: “I’m done with this foolishness. I’ve already told people this is a lie and I’m not going to entertain it.”At Tuesday’s press conference, Jane Doe read passages of what she said were her personal diaries from 1993 in the days immediately after she learnt she was pregnant. In one extract Walker is alleged to have told her that the pregnancy was “probably his ‘fault’ since he had very high levels of testosterone”.In a second passage, she wrote that Walker “has about gone off the deep end over this whole thing … He thinks that by not having the baby we do have a future chance for happiness that we can ‘grow strong again together’.”Allred read out what she said was a signed declaration from a friend of Jane Doe’s in which she recalled her confiding to her in 1993 that she was pregnant and that Walker had been the partner. Several years later, the friend said in her declaration, “she confessed to me that she had in fact had an abortion in 1993” and that Walker had personally driven her to the clinic.The first woman to make allegations against Walker told the Daily Beast last month that he paid for her to have an abortion in 2009.TopicsUS politicsRepublicansGeorgiaUS midterm elections 2022newsReuse this content More

US supreme court allows Congress to view Trump’s tax returnsOrder ends committee’s three-year battle to receive returns former president has long refused to release The US supreme court will allow a congressional committee to receive copies of Donald Trump’s tax returns, ending a three-year battle by the Democratic-led body to see the documents the former president has famously refused to release since his first White House bid.US court appears inclined to end special master review of Trump papersRead moreThe court did not accompany its decision with any public comment, but it rejected Trump’s plea for an order that would have prevented the treasury department from giving six years of tax returns for Trump and some of his businesses to the House ways and means committee.The influential committee will continue to be led by a Democratic party chair, in this case Massachusetts congressman Richard Neal, until the new Congress is sworn in in January with the Republicans in the majority and therefore filling committee chairs, following the midterm elections.It was Trump’s second loss at the supreme court in as many months, and third this year.In October, the court refused to step into the legal fight surrounding the FBI search of Trump’s Florida estate that turned up classified documents.In January, the court refused to stop the National Archives from turning over documents to the special House panel investigating the 6 January 2021 insurrection at the Capitol by extremist supporters of then-president Trump who were trying to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 election. Justice Clarence Thomas was the only vote in Trump’s favor.In the dispute over his tax returns, the treasury department had refused to provide the records during Trump’s presidency. But the Biden administration said federal law is clear that the committee has the right to examine any taxpayer’s return, including the president’s.Lower courts agreed that the committee has broad authority to obtain tax returns and rejected Trump’s claims that it was overstepping and only wanted the documents so they could be made public.The supreme court chief justice, John Roberts, imposed a temporary freeze on 1 November to allow the court to weigh the legal issues raised by Trump’s lawyers and the counter arguments of the administration and the House of Representatives.Just over three weeks later, the court lifted Roberts’s order.No supreme court justices on Tuesday recorded dissents to the order. The House ways and means committee in 2019 requested Trump’s returns under federal law, saying they were part of their investigation into Trump’s compliance with Internal Revenue Service auditing.Trump has been fighting the matter in court ever since.The treasury department is now cleared to hand the documents to the ways and means committee but it’s unclear what Democrats on the committee will be able to accomplish in the few weeks of congressional business left this year.The justice department under the Trump administration had defended a decision by then treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin to withhold the tax returns from Congress. Mnuchin argued that he could withhold the documents because he concluded they were being sought by Democrats for partisan reasons. A lawsuit ensued.After Biden took office, the committee renewed the request, seeking Trump’s tax returns and additional information from 2015 to 2020. The White House took the position that the request was a valid one and that the treasury department had no choice but to comply.Trump then attempted to halt the handover in court. Then Manhattan district attorney Cyrus Vance Jr obtained copies of Trump’s personal and business tax records as part of a criminal investigation.That case, too, went to the supreme court, which rejected Trump’s argument that he had broad immunity as president.In 2020, the New York Times published damning information about Trump’s wealth and taxes after obtaining tax information about the then president going back two decades.Documents showed chronic business losses and the fact that Trump paid barely any federal income tax, but he has not faced any conclusive legal consequences up to now and has boasted that a habit of tax avoidance “makes me smart”.TopicsDonald TrumpUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

The supreme court will allow a congressional committee to receive Donald Trump’s tax returns, the Associated Press reports, ending a three-year battle by the Democratic-led body to see the documents the former president has famously refused to release since his first White House bid.We’ll have more on this developing story as it happens.Three years of court battles came to a close today, when the supreme court allowed the Democratic-led House ways and means committee to receive Donald Trump’s tax returns over the former president’s opposition. Also ending today was Anthony Fauci’s streak of appearances at the White House. The top US public health official who became a household name during the Covid-19 pandemic made his last briefing to reporters before he steps down from the role, and implored Americans to get a booster shot to protect against the virus.Here’s what else happened today:
Joe Biden extended the pause on federal student loan repayments until 30 June in order to give his administration time to defend his debt forgiveness plan at the supreme court.
A former top prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election has some thoughts for how newly appointed special counsel Jack Smith could approach the criminal investigations into Trump.
Democrat Raphael Warnock has a narrow lead over GOP candidate Herschel Walker in the runoff election for Georgia’s Senate seat scheduled for 6 December.
Florida’s legislature appears to be moving to change a law that would allow Governor Ron DeSantis make a much-expected run for president.
Republican senator Lindsey Graham spoke to a special grand jury investigating meddling in Georgia’s 2020 election result, after months of trying to get out of it.
The NAACP civil rights group is among those cheering Biden’s decision to extent the pause on federal student loan repayments.“In the face of extreme greed and hypocrisy by the far-right, President Biden today is standing up for all Americans – middle-class and low-income families – who carry the heavy burden of student loan debt,” the group’s president Derrick Johnson. “The impact this extension will have in the lives of those who have been targeted by predatory student loans cannot be overstated.”Progressive House Democrat Ro Khanna joined in:This is the right move from @POTUS and a victory for those fighting to cancel student debt. We must cancel debt and make public higher education and trade school free for all. https://t.co/2MoDdLzoPL— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) November 22, 2022
Here’s Joe Biden in his own words, explaining his decision to extend the pause on federal student loan repayment:I’m confident that our student debt relief plan is legal. But it’s on hold because Republican officials want to block it.That’s why @SecCardona is extending the payment pause to no later than June 30, 2023, giving the Supreme Court time to hear the case in its current term. pic.twitter.com/873CurlHFZ— President Biden (@POTUS) November 22, 2022
Biden first announced the plan in August, and said federal student loan payments would restart in January of next year, and no later. He’s now reversed that, and in the video above, cites recent court rulings putting his loan forgiveness program on hold as the reason.The Biden administration will extend its pause on student loan repayments until 30 June, Bloomberg News reports:WHITE HOUSE TO EXTEND STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT HALT UP TO JUNE 30per @nancook— Josh Wingrove (@josh_wingrove) November 22, 2022
The decision comes after Joe Biden’s plan to relieve as much as $20,000 of some borrowers’ federal student loan debt was blocked by a federal court. The White House is appealing that order before the supreme court.Lindsey Graham’s office has released a brief statement after the Republican senator appeared today before a special grand jury investigating attempts by Donald Trump and his allies to meddle in the state’s election results.“Today, Senator Graham appeared before the Fulton County Special Grand Jury for just over two hours and answered all questions. The Senator feels he was treated with respect, professionalism, and courtesy. Out of respect for the grand jury process he will not comment on the substance of the questions,” the statement read.No supreme court justices recorded dissents to the order lifting a stay on an appeals court ruling that allows the House ways and means committee to access Donald Trump’s tax returns.The Democratic-led committee in 2019 requested the then-president’s returns under federal law, saying they were part of their investigation into Trump’s compliance with Internal Revenue Service auditing. Trump has been fighting the matter in court ever since, and supreme court chief justice John Roberts had earlier this month put a stay on the most recent ruling from a federal appeals court in the committee’s favor.The Treasury department is now cleared to hand the documents the ways and means committee. Democrats currently control the House, but will lose it at the start of 2023, when the new Republican majority takes their seats.US supreme court blocks handover of Trump’s tax returns to CongressRead moreThe supreme court will allow a congressional committee to receive Donald Trump’s tax returns, the Associated Press reports, ending a three-year battle by the Democratic-led body to see the documents the former president has famously refused to release since his first White House bid.We’ll have more on this developing story as it happens.Donald Trump is having his day in court as the justice department challenges the appointment of a special master in the Mar-a-Lago case.Politico reports that the appeals panel hearing the matter is skeptical of why an official was appointed to filter out privileged documents from the trove seized by federal agents:HAPPENING NOW: Appeals court panel (with two Trump appointees and a GWB appointee) is sharply critical of Trump effort to save special master process. They think Trump is seeking special pre-indictment treatment as an ex-president.— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) November 22, 2022
The special master review is seen as an attempt to frustrate and learn details of the investigation into alleged government secrets discovered at the former president’s south Florida resort.On another note:Trump attorney Jim TRUSTY says among the items seized from Trump’s home: a picture of Celine Dion.— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) November 22, 2022
An interesting development from Florida, where the new leader of the Republican-controlled House appears ready to repeal the state’s “resign to run” law, currently an obstacle to Ron DeSantis’s expected campaign for the White House.As things stand, DeSantis, who was re-elected this month in a landslide to a second term, would have to step down if he were to challenge for his party’s 2024 presidential nomination. His supporters acknowledged as much by chanting “two more years!” at his election night party. Governors in Florida serve four year terms.It’s the same rule that required Charlie Crist, DeSantis’s beaten Democratic opponent, to resign his US House seat earlier this year to challenge him.Politico’s reports that state House speaker Paul Renner says he’s willing to change the law next year, and allow DeSantis to fulfil his four-year term as governor at the same time as pursuing a presidential campaign in 2024.Fla House Speaker @Paul_Renner says he’s willing to change state law during 2023 session so @GovRonDeSantis can run for president without having to resign. Called it a “good idea.”— Gary Fineout (@fineout) November 22, 2022
And with a compliant, super-majority in both chambers of the state’s legislature, Republicans can pretty much do as they please.The US relationship with Saudi Arabia is still under review despite a Biden administration ruling that the Saudi crown prince has immunity from a lawsuit over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said today.Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist then living in the United States, was killed and dismembered in 2018 by Saudi agents in the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul, in an operation US intelligence believes was ordered by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Reuters writes.The prince has denied ordering the killing, which has cast a pall over relations between the two countries.Khashoggi’s fiancee has sued the prince in US court, but in a ruling last week, US justice department lawyers concluded that the prince had immunity as a result of having been named prime minister in the Saudi government in September..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The opinion that we provided does not in any way speak to the merits of the case or the status of the bilateral relationship.
Our review of that relationship is ongoing,” Blinken told reporters at a news conference in Qatar after an annual US-Qatar strategic dialogue.Blinken also said there were no plans for the prince to visit the United States.Donald Trump today asked a federal court in Florida to provide him and his lawyers with a complete version of the affidavit that federal investigators used to obtain a search warrant for his Florida property in August.Prosecutors are conducting a criminal investigation into the retention of government records at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort after his presidency ended, Reuters reports.The request to unseal the search warrant affidavit was made to US District Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida.A redacted version of the affidavit was made public in August after media organizations sought its release, with sections blacked out that prosecutors said should remain secret.The Justice Department said the redactions included information from “a broad range of civilian witnesses” as well as investigative techniques that, if disclosed, could reveal how to obstruct the probe.US Attorney General Merrick Garland last Friday appointed a special counsel, Jack Smith, to preside over criminal investigations involving the former president after Trump announced he would run for president again.A federal appeals court later today will hear arguments on whether an outside arbiter appointed by Cannon should be allowed to continue a review of documents seized in the search and determine whether any of the records should be kept from criminal investigators.Juror are deliberating over whether to convict five Oath Keepers militia members of seditious conspiracy, in what would be a milestone for the government’s prosecution of alleged January 6 insurrectionists. Meanwhile, Anthony Fauci made what could be his last appearance at the White House podium and asked Americans to get the latest Covid-19 vaccine booster as the holiday travel season arrives.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
Top House Republican Kevin McCarthy plans a “major” announcement around 4:30 pm eastern time during his visit to El Paso, Texas. This could be the start of a GOP effort to impeach homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of the surge in migrants to the US-Mexico border since Joe Biden took office.
A former top prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election has some thoughts for how newly appointed special counsel Jack Smith could approach the criminal investigations into Donald Trump.
Democrat Raphael Warnock has a narrow lead over GOP candidate Herschel Walker in the run-off election for Georgia’s Senate seat scheduled for 6 December.
Andrew Weissmann was one of the top members on special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s team looking into Russian interference in the 2016 election that brought Trump to power.Now another special prosecutor has been appointed to decide on whether to bring charges against Trump over the January 6 insurrection and the alleged government secrets found at Mar-a-Lago. Writing in the New York Times, Weissmann shares some advice for Jack Smith, the veteran prosecutor appointed to the role.Chief among these is the possibility of Smith bringing charges against Trump – an option Mueller didn’t have, Weissmann says. “Mr. Smith is stepping into a political context very different from the one that confronted Mr. Mueller. Most notably, because of Justice Department policy, Mr. Mueller was forbidden to charge a sitting president. Now that Mr. Trump is a former president, Mr. Smith is not subject to that limitation. (That policy does not apply to presidential candidates like Mr. Trump.),” Weissmann writes.He also notes that Smith has the option of taking a more transparent approach to his investigation than Mueller, who was famously tight-lipped about what he was finding.“Neither the current special counsel regulations nor Justice Department rules require Mr. Smith to take a vow of silence with the American public,” Weissmann writes. “His ability to explain and educate will be critical to the acceptance of the department’s mission by the American public. It will permit Mr. Smith to be heard directly and not through the gauze of pundits and TV anchors; it will allow the public to directly assess Mr. Smith, a heretofore little-known figure; and it will permit Mr. Smith to counteract those strong forces seeking to discredit or misleadingly shape the narrative about the investigations.”Under Joe Biden, the United States passed the first significant piece of legislation to fight climate change and reversed decades of opposition to creating a fund for poor countries suffering the worst effects of global rising temperatures. Now, it’s trying to portray China as the world’s climate change villain – but as Oliver Milman reports, activists aren’t buying it:The US, fresh from reversing its 30 years of opposition to a “loss and damage” fund for poorer countries suffering the worst impacts of the climate crisis, has signaled that its longstanding image as global climate villain should now be pinned on a new culprit: China.Following years of tumult in which the US refused to provide anything resembling compensation for climate damages, followed by Donald Trump’s removal of the US from the Paris climate agreement, there was a profound shift at the Cop27 UN talks in Egypt, with Joe Biden’s administration agreeing to the new loss and damage fund.The US also backed language in the new agreement, which finally concluded in the early hours of Sunday morning after an often fraught period of negotiations between governments, that would demand the phase-out of all unabated fossil fuels, only to be thwarted by major oil-producing nations such as Saudi Arabia and Russia.Despite these stances, the US continued to be the leading target of ire from climate activists who blame it for obstruction and for failing to reckon with its role as history’s largest ever emitter of planet-heating gases. On Friday, the US was given the unwanted title of “colossal fossil” by climate groups for supposedly failing to push through the loss and damage assistance at Cop27.The US delegation in Sharm el-Sheikh chafed at this image, with John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy, using his closing remarks to shift the focus on to China, now the world’s largest emitter. Kerry said that “all nations have a stake in the choices China makes in this critical decade. The United States and China should be able to accelerate progress together, not only for our sake, but for future generations – and we are all hopeful that China will live up to its global responsibility.” US receives stinging criticism at Cop27 despite China’s growing emissionsRead moreAnthony Fauci is making his final appearance at the White House podium, ahead of his retirement next month as America’s top public health official:.⁦@PressSec⁩ says this is Dr Fauci’s last time at the podium pic.twitter.com/fgeE36pkzD— AlexGangitano (@AlexGangitano) November 22, 2022
The director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984, Fauci became a household name as the public face of the US government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic beginning in early 2020. Here’s where his parting words to reporters gathered at the White House:FAUCI: “So my message and my final message, may be the final message I give you from this podium, is that please for your own safety, for that of your family, get your updated COVID-19 shot as soon as you’re eligible to protect yourself, your family and your community.”— Molly Nagle (@MollyNagle3) November 22, 2022
Fauci is appearing alongside the White House’s coronavirus response coordinator Ashish Jha to announce the Biden’s administration’s new six-week campaign to encourage Americans to get Covid-19 boosters in anticipation of the holidays.He’s in court, he’s on the campaign trail and he’s once again being investigated by a special prosecutor.Like it or not, Donald Trump will frequently be in the news for the next two years – at least – and the Guardian’s community team would like to hear your thoughts on how reporters should cover the former president. Weigh in at the link below:Tell us: how should the media cover Trump’s 2024 run?Read more More

During the month leading up to the US midterm elections, talk of a commanding Republican victory went from a “red wave” to a “red tsunami”. The Republicans were on for the win. The polls and gambling markets, or so-called “prediction markets”, were confident.

Only the red wave never broke – Democrats tightened their shaky grip on the Senate and, while they lost control of the House, they did so by a much narrower margin than had been expected.

As part of my research on political betting and gambling markets, I’ve identified a surge of interest in political gambling since the Brexit referendum and the 2016 US presidential election. Underdog victories in these contests alerted many people in the UK and US – but also internationally – to the opportunity to win big by gambling on politics. And, along with the latest polls, what the betting markets are saying is increasingly considered a good predictor of future events. But not this time.

In the run-up to the US midterm, I was betting (with my own money) against the Republican wave and for a close election – not out of any particular insight so much as caution.

When the results began to trickle in and it became clear the predicted Republican takeover was not happening, I had an unexpectedly successful few days of profits. Meanwhile, I frantically tried to figure out why the betting markets had predicted otherwise and what this failure meant.

Why so wrong?

To understand why the gambling markets got it so wrong, we first need to look at what evidence there was for a red wave.

1. History says so

First up there’s historical precedence. The party of a first-term US president almost always loses significant numbers of seats in both houses of Congress in the midterms two years after they are elected.

2. The polls tightened

The polls also indicated that a red wave could happen. Democrats took the lead in the polls in mid-June, but the lead started narrowing in mid-September, with the Democrats and Republicans tied on 50 senate seats each on November 1.

Why was the midterm result such a surprise?
EPA

3. Predictions went red

While some polls indicated a tight race, organisations using more complex predictive models swung towards Republicans. By election day, FiveThirtyEight, the highest-profile of these organisations, was predicting the Republicans would take control of the Senate 59 times out of a hundred – and people listened.

4. The odds were high

This meant the markets were heavily favouring Republicans by late October. On the UK site Betfair, the world’s largest betting exchange, the likelihood of a republican majority shot above 50% on October 19 and peaked at 78% on election day – only to crash to 12% a day later as results began to become clear. On the foremost US provider, PredictIt, Republicans were trading at around 75 cents a share (a winning share returns US$1, a losing share 0 cents) before they, too, crashed in the face of election count data.

Inflated victory

Now looking back, it’s clear that a market bubble had inflated around a Republican victory. One of the maxims repeated in political betting circles is “bet the trend, not the poll” and the trend, as evidenced in the polling, started shifting sharply towards Republicans before then levelling off. Betters and modellers projected the original trend towards Republicans and ignored the levelling off.

There were some in the community who were arguing against the crowd – that the odds had shifted too far towards the Republicans. But their voices were drowned out in a sea of optimism (or pessimism, depending on your politics). Indeed, Matthew Shaddick, head of politics at the UK betting exchange Smarkets, spoke about it on the company podcast. He said that the last month before the election was “one-way traffic” with everyone wanting to back Republicans.

Not quite as expected.
EPA

The sophistication and budgets of election campaigns in the US are also so extensive that considerable effort is made to influence the narrative through polling. According to my contacts, there was a flurry of Republican-leaning polls that were pushing their chances. And, as we know, polls influence people’s decisions when it comes to betting.

I’m also often asked whether political parties might bet on themselves to improve the perception of their campaign. While this is less likely to have any consequence with larger events such as the US elections, as with polling, at a smaller scale it can have an effect on a candidate’s implied probability of winning, which can then filter into the media.

There is more research to be done, but this failure of prediction could not come at a worse time for US political gambling providers, styled as prediction markets. They have been trying to convince a sceptical regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, that political gambling markets add value to politics and financial traders because of their predictive potency. Indeed, gambling markets are usually considered much more accurate than polls, but it’s hard to see the midterms as anything other than a failure of prediction. More

Tell us: how should the media cover Trump’s 2024 run?We would like to hear from people in the US about how the media should cover Donald Trump’s candidacy Donald Trump’s announcement of a third bid for the White House renewed a conversation in newsrooms about the best way to cover his candidacy.On the one hand, the campaign of a former president who commands the loyalty of a sizable portion of the American electorate is clearly newsworthy. On the other hand, even if his lies are called out, the decision to feature conspiracy theories and demagoguery prominently in news coverage can cause real damage, as media organizations learned from Trump’s previous campaigns as well as his presidency.We want to hear your views on striking the right balance. Tell us how you think the news media should and shouldn’t be covering the former president’s campaign.We may feature some of your responses in our reporting.Share your viewsWe will only use the data you provide us for the purpose of the feature. We will delete any personal data when we no longer require it for this purpose. For more information please see our terms of service and privacy policy.If you are 18 years or over, you can get in touch by filling in the form below.Your responses are secure as the form is encrypted and only the Guardian has access to your contributions. One of our journalists will be in contact before we publish, so please do leave contact details.If you’re having trouble using the form, click here.TopicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2024US politicscalloutReuse this content More

Where was Ivanka when Donald launched his campaign? Doing what Trumps do and looking after number oneArwa MahdawiThe former first daughter is no idiot. Why risk tainting her brand by associating with a loser? Just a few years ago Ivanka Trump reportedly had her heart set on being the US’s first female president. Now, however, she seems desperate to stay as far away from politics as possible. The former first daughter has made it clear that while Daddy may be running for office again, she has no intention of joining him on the campaign trail. She has already selflessly served the public once, you see, and the public didn’t sufficiently appreciate her sacrifices. Now it’s time for a little self-care. “I love my father very much,” Ivanka said in a statement following Donald Trump’s official 2024 announcement. “This time around, I am choosing to prioritise my children and the private life we are creating as a family. I do not plan to be involved in politics.” To really hammer things home she was conspicuously absent when Trump, surrounded by family, made his official announcement from Mar-a-Lago last week. Even Ivanka’s husband, Jared Kushner, was in attendance.Rumour has it that Trump isn’t happy his eldest daughter has decided to keep her distance. According to the New York Post, Trump spent much of Tiffany Trump’s recent wedding unsuccessfully trying to convince Ivanka, who has always been a big hit among his base, to join him for his campaign announcement – which I’m sure thrilled Tiffany, who has always seemed like the most neglected child. Ivanka, however, stood firm.00:52And why wouldn’t she? Ivanka may be many things, but she is not an idiot. The 41-year-old “Girlboss” entrepreneur has always spent a lot of time worrying about her personal brand. Hitching your wagon to Donald Trump at the moment? Definitely not good for the personal brand. Trump doesn’t scream “winner” right now: even many of his old allies have turned against him. The Rupert-Murdoch-owned-New York Post, for example, has spent the last couple of weeks gleefully trolling the former president. Two days after the midterms, it called him “TRUMPTY DUMPTY” on its front page. Even more humiliating was the way it chose to cover Trump’s run for president – “Florida man makes announcement” was the strapline that ran at the very bottom of the front page.At the moment, the consensus seems to be that Trump has lost his lustre and has zero chance of becoming president again. If Ivanka decides to side with her dad now she has nothing to gain. If she keeps her distance long enough, however, there’s a possibility she’ll be able to successfully rebrand herself, and all her liberal friends who turned their backs on her will invite her to dinner parties again. It’s a well-trodden path, after all: do a bunch of odious things when you’re in politics, get booted out of power, keep a low profile for a bit, then reinvent yourself by doing some high-profile charity work or appearing on a reality TV show. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ivanka’s PR people have been busy on the phone calling Volodymyr Zelenskiy (please, just one photo op!) and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (please, just a quick appearance on the podcast), in an attempt to ready her for a re-entrance to polite society.Speaking of odious people who have reinvented themselves: Michael Cohen, who was formerly Trump’s fixer and who has now successfully rebranded himself as a guy who gets paid to dish dirt on the Trump family on liberal cable news channels, has an interesting theory about Ivanka’s self-exile from politics. Cohen told MSNBC on Saturday that he reckons Jared and Ivanka have been working with the FBI and were the ones who informed the authorities about classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Ivanka’s involvement with the FBI, Cohen says, is why she’s not helping her father.I don’t know whether Ivanka is snitching to the FBI or not. But you know what I am very confident saying? Ivanka is busy doing what Trumps do best: looking out for number one. At the moment, that means staying away from her dad’s drama. If Trump’s fortunes change, however, and it looks like he might actually be on his way to the White House again, I have a feeling Ivanka might suddenly reassess her interest in politics.TopicsIvanka TrumpOpinionDonald TrumpUS politicscommentReuse this content More