The Trump Presidency

First topic message reminder :

Well we'll wait and see about Arizona. Pundits seem to think it's a done deal; they don't seem to have considered it's only Election Day votes left to count.

Ohio called, but Texas and Florida not, which is very poor. Iowa should be called soon for Trump. Trump with healthy leads in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania...he needs 'em if Arizona's going blue.

Georgia seems to be faltering for Trump, but he's still ahead for now. North Carolina's probably in recount territory. unless Trump has more votes to secure it.

This mainstream media bias is quite something. Trump 49-48 ahead in Montana, 50% voted...oh yeah, that's too close to call. Trump 50-48 ahead in Virginia, 76% voted....oh yeah, we're calling that for Biden.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The one advantage of Biden winning is we won't see the violent BLM and Antifa organisations rioting and looting and burning things down. I think any Republican protests will be incredibly small.

Careful Duty, your colours are showing. Unless you mean the violence perpetrated upon peaceful BLM and antifa marches by white supremacists emboldened by Trump.

No, I definitely mean the violence instigated by the extremist and violent far-left organisations like BLM and Antifa. We may need see some violence by the extremist and far-right white supremacists after this election, but they tend to be nowhere near as well-organised or mobilised as their extremist counterparts on the left.

You've never seen any of the reports of the armed right-wing militia groups? Odd, considering you usually keep abreast of such things.

I have, indeed.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The one advantage of Biden winning is we won't see the violent BLM and Antifa organisations rioting and looting and burning things down. I think any Republican protests will be incredibly small.

Careful Duty, your colours are showing. Unless you mean the violence perpetrated upon peaceful BLM and antifa marches by white supremacists emboldened by Trump.

No, I definitely mean the violence instigated by the extremist and violent far-left organisations like BLM and Antifa. We may need see some violence by the extremist and far-right white supremacists after this election, but they tend to be nowhere near as well-organised or mobilised as their extremist counterparts on the left.

You've never seen any of the reports of the armed right-wing militia groups? Odd, considering you usually keep abreast of such things.

I have, indeed.

So you'll know that they've been around far longer and are much more organized than the much smaller and rather ragtag Antifa and BLM groups. Antifa are much more like the Army of God (the pro-lifers that kill people) - a banner under which people place themselves rather than an organised group.

He won't be able to answer for five days for suggesting we need extremist and white supremacist violence.

To be fair, that most likely (but not definitely) was a typo/auto-correct.
Despite obviously wanting Trump to win, Duty hasn't gone all nutjob on us like loads of crazy and idiotic Republicans on social media.
"Look at this proof of electoral fraud and why has no-one told the police?" Uh, because a) you've posted a screenshot from last year and b) you obviously think posting on Twitter is a better way to spend your time.

Freudian Slip?

Trump can still rescue credibility by saying that though he thinks the election was rigged he is going to be a statesman and concede as its in America's best interests for a smooth transition.

The more this drags on the more likely we are to see trouble and divides getting even bigger..

You are 74....Been the King of developers...."written" best sellers...Been the number one show on TV and somehow you became the President..

Helluva career.....

One of the most forceful, charismatic figures in history....Time to go.

JuliusHMarx wrote:To be fair, that most likely (but not definitely) was a typo/auto-correct.
Despite obviously wanting Trump to win, Duty hasn't gone all nutjob on us like loads of crazy and idiotic Republicans on social media.
"Look at this proof of electoral fraud and why has no-one told the police?" Uh, because a) you've posted a screenshot from last year and b) you obviously think posting on Twitter is a better way to spend your time.

I don't agree with Duty much if at all but I find his opinions interesting and respect the fact that he's prepared to argue his position without getting cattish.

You're nicer people than me. And far more forgiving, Jules. But that's why you're a hall of famer and I'm likely to just present an award on the night.

The far right has been responsible for more deaths over the last 5 years than any other area of the political spectrum.

Antifa and BLM did not plot to kidnap a state governor.

Biden will not change anything much anyway. It will just be the same as the Republican rule only with a happy fluffy smile on their face

Plus everything whether it be a war or high taxation can be justified by the middle class and sanctimonious as "It's at least not Trump"

Steffan wrote:Biden will not change anything much anyway. It will just be the same as the Republican rule only with a happy fluffy smile on their face

Plus everything whether it be a war or high taxation can be justified by the middle class and sanctimonious as "It's at least not Trump"

Cool. Cynicism even I'd be proud of .

We'll have to see. Even if he corrects some of Trumps aberrations (Paris Climate Agreement, Iran nuclear deal etc), it'll be a step in the right direction.

Networks now calling the inevitable Pennsylvania win and the presidency

I believe CNN were the first to call it. The timing no doubt influenced by a) Trump's tweet an hour ago that he had won the election, by a lot, and b) a Trump campaign 'big' press conference scheduled for about 3 minutes after CNN called it.

Melania is the happiest woman in America right now, she wont have to wait another 4 years to get a divorce.

Big fan of Rudy Giuliani giving a speech outside a crack den.

Trump is still a great man

And I thank him for the last four years

Trump apparently in Virginia playing golf. Sums up the man and his Presidency. What a plum.

Biggest issue for Trump now, is outside of Georgia, it seems the margin of victory for Biden in all the other battleground states is such that only Georgia could possibly have a recount, and even then, it still wouldn't be enough to win. There aren't many avenues available to actually drag this out. Should make for a fun next two months.

I think it'll run out of steam pretty quickly . The best Rudy could produce today was a watcher was stood far away from a counter. Hardly earth shattering stuff and the major networks are already pulling coverage off these stunts

Well Trump didn't rule with sense or dignity and so its no big surprise he can't lose with sense or dignity either.

GSC wrote:Networks now calling the inevitable Pennsylvania win and the presidency

Hi, I have a question of an academic nature - open to all.

When exactly is the point that a state such as Pennsylvania has its result 'projected'? Is there a formal, precise, mathematical definition? Or am I right in saying that some networks project these results earlier than others, and its all a bit of a subjective science?

At the time of writing, Biden's current lead in PA is smaller than the the total number of votes still to be counted - not for a second am I saying his victory is in any doubt but strictly speaking a Trump win is not mathematically impossible yet. So there must be some sort of critical threshold that once hit triggers the official projection. In probability terms could this be the point where the result becomes 95% or 99% certain or whatever? It just all seems a bit arbitrary.

I think I read earlier in this thread that Fox called Arizona for Biden very early, but according to the betting exchanges Trump was still in with a 20-25% chance there up until yesterday - so evidently there's still some room for these very grand-sounding 'projections' to go wrong.

Hope this makes sense

theslosty wrote:

GSC wrote:Networks now calling the inevitable Pennsylvania win and the presidency

Hi, I have a question of an academic nature - open to all.

When exactly is the point that a state such as Pennsylvania has its result 'projected'? Is there a formal, precise, mathematical definition? Or am I right in saying that some networks project these results earlier than others, and its all a bit of a subjective science?

At the time of writing, Biden's current lead in PA is smaller than the the total number of votes still to be counted - not for a second am I saying his victory is in any doubt but strictly speaking a Trump win is not mathematically impossible yet. So there must be some sort of critical threshold that once hit triggers the official projection. In probability terms could this be the point where the result becomes 95% or 99% certain or whatever? It just all seems a bit arbitrary.

I think I read earlier in this thread that Fox called Arizona for Biden very early, but according to the betting exchanges Trump was still in with a 20-25% chance there up until yesterday - so evidently there's still some room for these very grand-sounding 'projections' to go wrong.

Hope this makes sense

I believe in Arizona the issue was that the initial estimates missed out the fact that there were still 14% of the votes to count. Absolutely hilarious that one of the biggest factors in Biden's success in Arizona is down to Trump bad mouthing prominent republican McCain.

Pennsylvania is interesting because Trump appeared to have a big lead all the way through and yet it was never real and seldom in doubt for the Democrats.

It is all so difficult. The USA is of course a very big place and made up of states all with their own set of rules, but the way they run things can sometimes feel primitive compared to Europe.

It's mainly based on projections of where the remaining votes are coming from.

In Pennsylvania for example, the remaining votes are mail in votes from places that have been historically democrat strongholds, and have voted strongly for Biden in the votes already counted. Therefore once Biden took the lead, and the remaining votes to be counted were almost certain to heavily favor him, Pennsylvania was pretty much a safe bet to be closed off.

In Arizona it was only Fox I believe who called it, other networks and broadcasters left it open.

Also why states like California project early despite counting still going on. Historically there was next to no chance of it flipping red and when the data supported that it was closed.

Trump's lead was also a bit manufactured given republicans blocked requests from Pennsylvania and other states to start counting mail in votes early, if they had, it probably would've been apparent quite early the scale of mail in votes

GSC wrote:I think it'll run out of steam pretty quickly . The best Rudy could produce today was a watcher was stood far away from a counter. Hardly earth shattering stuff and the major networks are already pulling coverage off these stunts

It's one thing accusing Democrats of rigging the election, but the courts aren't going to take long in dismissing these challenges because there's so little plausible evidence of anything, and it's at that point that I think even senior Republicans will acknowledge that their man lost, unless we're expected to believe that the courts are in on it too.

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Giuliani's press conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, situated between a sex shop and a crematorium! They're just embarrassing themselves now, and while Trump might not care, surely the rest of the party can't be too happy about it.

The other thing to add is that world leaders, including allies Netanyahu and the King of Saudi Arabia (though not yet Putin) have publicly congratulated Biden on his victory. It's over.

lostinwales wrote:

theslosty wrote:

GSC wrote:Networks now calling the inevitable Pennsylvania win and the presidency

Hi, I have a question of an academic nature - open to all.

When exactly is the point that a state such as Pennsylvania has its result 'projected'? Is there a formal, precise, mathematical definition? Or am I right in saying that some networks project these results earlier than others, and its all a bit of a subjective science?

At the time of writing, Biden's current lead in PA is smaller than the the total number of votes still to be counted - not for a second am I saying his victory is in any doubt but strictly speaking a Trump win is not mathematically impossible yet. So there must be some sort of critical threshold that once hit triggers the official projection. In probability terms could this be the point where the result becomes 95% or 99% certain or whatever? It just all seems a bit arbitrary.

I think I read earlier in this thread that Fox called Arizona for Biden very early, but according to the betting exchanges Trump was still in with a 20-25% chance there up until yesterday - so evidently there's still some room for these very grand-sounding 'projections' to go wrong.

Hope this makes sense

I believe in Arizona the issue was that the initial estimates missed out the fact that there were still 14% of the votes to count. Absolutely hilarious that one of the biggest factors in Biden's success in Arizona is down to Trump bad mouthing prominent republican McCain.

Pennsylvania is interesting because Trump appeared to have a big lead all the way through and yet it was never real and seldom in doubt for the Democrats.

It is all so difficult. The USA is of course a very big place and made up of states all with their own set of rules, but the way they run things can sometimes feel primitive compared to Europe.

Further to the above, in most cases the media call the results when they are 99.5% certain of the outcome. They used to be rather more cavalier, and it was something of a race to be first to call a State, but Fox's call of Florida for Gore in 2000 has led to them being more circumspect.

In this election, there are a few states that were too close to call for a long time, and I think even now there is no call on Georgia, North Carolina and only Fox have called Arizona (Alaska is not called yet because they haven't even started counting mail-in ballots). With Pennsylvania, while it was obvious for about 48 hours that Biden was picking up votes and was going to win, the calls only came when his lead exceeded 0.5% and with evidence that it was still increasing (will end up around 1%). I think Nevada was somewhat similar

I think Georgia will end up with a Biden majority from this count, but definitely in recount territory (as with Wisconsin*, noting that US recounts generally make <1000 votes difference). Arizona may also end up in recount territory - Biden leads but the remaining votes are slightly favouring Trump, likely by not quite enough. North Carolina - last I saw suggested Biden needed 85% of the outstanding vote to close the gap (assuming the number of votes has been estimated correctly), improbable, but these are expected to be strongly pro-Biden and he was taking 80% of the mail in ballots in Pa, so not absolutely out of the question yet.

* Georgia and Arizona will do a recount if the gap is <0.5%, Wisconsin <1.0% - Wisconsin's gap is 0.7% Biden, so has been called despite the recount, whereas Ga and Az are likely to remain uncalled until after their recounts.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It's over.

We knew that about Thursday last week.

There’s no evidence of any fraud, it’s just the Republicans dragging this out, and the media needing some coverage to keep people interested.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
I'm surprised no one's mentioned Giuliani's press conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, situated between a sex shop and a crematorium!

I read somewhere that he didn't know if he was coming or going.

Excellent.

Once Giuliani fails in these legal challenges to mail in ballots Trump will dump him to one side as Trump always does when he's done using someone.

It's quite a fall for grace for a public figure who was so respected post 9/11 that he was nicknamed 'America's mayor' and could earn $200k an appearance as a public speaker.

Since then his role as Trumps 'first friend' has seen him appearing on TV to defend Trump boasting about sexual assault on the Access Holywood tape through to these sorry legal challenges.

Joe Biden, "there's only 3 things that he mentions in a sentence: a noun, a verb and 9/11." Given that Giuliani is reported to have never forgiven/forgotten that line he will be absolutely hating this outcome.

I suppose it's possible that there's some bombshell evidence that they've been holding back, but I just don't believe Trump would be capable of sitting on something like that. Plus it's not like it's just one state, like it was in 2000.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I suppose it's possible that there's some bombshell evidence that they've been holding back, but I just don't believe Trump would be capable of sitting on something like that. Plus it's not like it's one state, like it was in 2000.

There really isn't, otherwise it would already have come to light in the hearings in the state courts. There have been a few minor procedural things that Trump's team have won on, a few similar they've lost on and nothing more significant than whether ballots arriving after the election should be counted (and Trump is behind even without them). The suggestions of widespread voter fraud have not been backed up with any credible evidence.

"ok dad I booked the four seasons, the hotel was expensive but I got a great rate on their landscaping location".

"Godammit Eric"

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I suppose it's possible that there's some bombshell evidence that they've been holding back, but I just don't believe Trump would be capable of sitting on something like that. Plus it's not like it's just one state, like it was in 2000.

One of the stories I have read (I think it was the Grauniad) was about James Baker. He was interviewed about the Trump challenges having lead Republican efforts in Florida in the pivotal defeat of Al Gore.

What he said is that the effort involved was huge, requiring an army of lawyers. He was basically saying that Trump has not got a hope in hell of mustering such an effort in so many states, and its not even that close in the same way that Florida was.

Still, Trump is doing his best to raise money for the upcoming struggle even if a very large proportion of it is going to pay off election expenses. All his efforts are going to achieve is to give money to lawyers.

Trump campaign is indicating rallies will be held. Which is basically saying 'we haven't got anything that will stand up in court, but let's all shout about how the election was stolen from us'
Basically a loser's approach to undermining democracy to salvage his fragile ego.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Trump campaign is indicating rallies will be held. Which is basically saying 'we haven't got anything that will stand up in court, but let's all shout about how the election was stolen from us'
Basically a loser's approach to undermining democracy to salvage his fragile ego.

And, as usual, it appears his enablers-in-chief (McConnell, Graham, Cruz, Rubio etc) are facilitating the continuation of this nonsense. Until one/some of them grow a pair (or the layers just say "Oh, **** off for God's sake!"), this'll continue.

McConnell's work to get Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett confirmed to the supreme court during Trumps administration will effect the USA for generations. He seems to have mastered obstructionism and really has earned the moniker 'the Grim Reaper'.

dummy_half wrote:
Further to the above, in most cases the media call the results when they are 99.5% certain of the outcome. They used to be rather more cavalier, and it was something of a race to be first to call a State, but Fox's call of Florida for Gore in 2000 has led to them being more circumspect.

In this election, there are a few states that were too close to call for a long time, and I think even now there is no call on Georgia, North Carolina and only Fox have called Arizona (Alaska is not called yet because they haven't even started counting mail-in ballots). With Pennsylvania, while it was obvious for about 48 hours that Biden was picking up votes and was going to win, the calls only came when his lead exceeded 0.5% and with evidence that it was still increasing (will end up around 1%). I think Nevada was somewhat similar

I think Georgia will end up with a Biden majority from this count, but definitely in recount territory (as with Wisconsin*, noting that US recounts generally make <1000 votes difference). Arizona may also end up in recount territory - Biden leads but the remaining votes are slightly favouring Trump, likely by not quite enough. North Carolina - last I saw suggested Biden needed 85% of the outstanding vote to close the gap (assuming the number of votes has been estimated correctly), improbable, but these are expected to be strongly pro-Biden and he was taking 80% of the mail in ballots in Pa, so not absolutely out of the question yet.

* Georgia and Arizona will do a recount if the gap is <0.5%, Wisconsin <1.0% - Wisconsin's gap is 0.7% Biden, so has been called despite the recount, whereas Ga and Az are likely to remain uncalled until after their recounts.

Thanks, this was more or less the reply I was looking for.

I do have another question though - the betting markets still give Trump a 2-3% chance of winning the popular vote, even after he has lost the election. I know 2-3% is hardly much but I can't fathom how that is even at all possible - is he not millions of votes behind Biden in the popular vote? Do correct me if I'm wrong

Perhaps there are still votes to be counted in states that have already been projected Republican - such as Texas or Alabama or somewhere like that?

The popular vote doesn't really matter in america, trump lost it against Hilary too. Rather each state has a certain number of "points" based on population, and all but two award them on a winner takes all basis (e.g Pennsylvania has 20 "points", Biden takes all 20 regardless of whether he wins by 1 vote or a million. So trump's really needs to manage to find enough dirt to flip a couple of states (recounts, getting votes disqualified etc).

The winner is the person who gets above 269 points and has the majority

GSC wrote:The popular vote doesn't really matter in america, trump lost it against Hilary too. Rather each state has a certain number of "points" based on population, and all but two award them on a winner takes all basis (e.g Pennsylvania has 20 "points", Biden takes all 20 regardless of whether he wins by 1 vote or a million. So trump's really needs to manage to find enough dirt to flip a couple of states (recounts, getting votes disqualified etc).

The winner is the person who gets above 269 points and has the majority

Why bother complicating what should be a very simple thing? US elections are a binary choice - most votes wins. It should be that easy.

I guess it's supposed to try and balance out only a few cities interests being represented. It's gone slightly awry when someone can lose the popular vote by 3m and win though.

Fox further distancing themselves from Trump by cutting off White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany whilst she purported widespread voter fraud without any evidence.

I wonder who Fox/Murdoch will pin their colours to next?

A bully has few friends when he needs them most.

Samo wrote:

GSC wrote:The popular vote doesn't really matter in america, trump lost it against Hilary too. Rather each state has a certain number of "points" based on population, and all but two award them on a winner takes all basis (e.g Pennsylvania has 20 "points", Biden takes all 20 regardless of whether he wins by 1 vote or a million. So trump's really needs to manage to find enough dirt to flip a couple of states (recounts, getting votes disqualified etc).

The winner is the person who gets above 269 points and has the majority

Why bother complicating what should be a very simple thing?  US elections are a binary choice - most votes wins.  It should be that easy.

But the US is historically a federation rather than a single country, and has used the Electoral College system right from its founding (although at first the Electors were just selected from State representatives rather than based on the vote in that state). It's always been a possibility that the loser of the popular vote wins the Presidency, and which party gains from this has varied over time - JFK got fewer votes than Nixon in 1960. There are two issues at the moment:

1 - The number of electoral college votes is based on the number of members of congress of each state, which is based on population (as of the 2010 census) for Congress but always 2 Senators. As such, Wyoming, ND, SD and Montana have 1+2 representatives, California 53+2 - the Republicans win all the small states so gain their over-representation in the EC. For comparison, Wyoming gives an electoral college vote for each of 90K voters, other small states it's around one EC college vote per 200K voters (say Kansas, Idaho etc) while larger states give one EC vote for about 300K voters. Republicans win all the smaller rural states, so need less voters there to pick up more EC votes (this has not always been the case).

2 - The Democrats win their big states by more than the Republicans do. In particular, California will account for virtually the entire popular vote margin, as the Democrats win by a 2 to 1 margin in a state that accounts for about 10% of the whole voting population of the US (Biden will win by between 5 and 6 million votes in the state, Clinton lost the popular vote in the other 49 states combined). By comparison, the margin in Texas is likely to be around 600K votes, and about a 6% margin.

GSC wrote:The popular vote doesn't really matter in america, trump lost it against Hilary too. Rather each state has a certain number of "points" based on population, and all but two award them on a winner takes all basis (e.g Pennsylvania has 20 "points", Biden takes all 20 regardless of whether he wins by 1 vote or a million. So trump's really needs to manage to find enough dirt to flip a couple of states (recounts, getting votes disqualified etc).

The winner is the person who gets above 269 points and has the majority

I know the popular vote doesn't matter - I'm just trying to figure out why it's a betting market that isn't completely finished yet. Trump is 33/1 now to win the popular vote, so it's pretty unlikely but not impossible according to the markets.
I won't, but what's to stop me from lumping my life savings on Biden at the moment?

Last I checked Biden's around 5 million votes ahead with about 7 million votes still to be counted.

Probably for the same reason as the EC, on the off chance Trump gets all mail in ballots invalidated or something.

Quick check of one bookie has the win market taken down now. You might also be limited in how much.

dummy_half wrote:

Samo wrote:

GSC wrote:The popular vote doesn't really matter in america, trump lost it against Hilary too. Rather each state has a certain number of "points" based on population, and all but two award them on a winner takes all basis (e.g Pennsylvania has 20 "points", Biden takes all 20 regardless of whether he wins by 1 vote or a million. So trump's really needs to manage to find enough dirt to flip a couple of states (recounts, getting votes disqualified etc).

The winner is the person who gets above 269 points and has the majority

Why bother complicating what should be a very simple thing?  US elections are a binary choice - most votes wins.  It should be that easy.

But the US is historically a federation rather than a single country, and has used the Electoral College system right from its founding (although at first the Electors were just selected from State representatives rather than based on the vote in that state). It's always been a possibility that the loser of the popular vote wins the Presidency, and which party gains from this has varied over time - JFK got fewer votes than Nixon in 1960. There are two issues at the moment:

1 - The number of electoral college votes is based on the number of members of congress of each state, which is based on population (as of the 2010 census) for Congress but always 2 Senators. As such, Wyoming, ND, SD and Montana have 1+2 representatives, California 53+2 - the Republicans win all the small states so gain their over-representation in the EC. For comparison, Wyoming gives an electoral college vote for each of 90K voters, other small states it's around one EC college vote per 200K voters (say Kansas, Idaho etc) while larger states give one EC vote for about 300K voters. Republicans win all the smaller rural states, so need less voters there to pick up more EC votes (this has not always been the case).

2 - The Democrats win their big states by more than the Republicans do. In particular, California will account for virtually the entire popular vote margin, as the Democrats win by a 2 to 1 margin in a state that accounts for about 10% of the whole voting population of the US (Biden will win by between 5 and 6 million votes in the state, Clinton lost the popular vote in the other 49 states combined). By comparison, the margin in Texas is likely to be around 600K votes, and about a 6% margin.

According to Wiki JFK just edged out Nixon in 1960 by 0.2 percentage points.
What you've written is broadly correct - it is true that small states like Wyoming are over-represented. But just for the sake of balance, not all of these states lean Republican, the Dems also benefit from this effect in states like Vermont, Rhode Island and DC.

As for your second point, I feel this is generally true in most elections - but in this one Biden has won some quite important states by very small margins - Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia. Trump on the other hand won other "tossup" states like Florida and Ohio relatively easily.

Where the Republicans really seem to benefit is the Senate elections - where every state elects two Senators regardless of its population. This is where it gets really silly when Wyoming is given the exact same representation as California

thelosty

No idea why the bookies would still be giving odds, other than perhaps some people are still betting on Trump winning and don't understand that he has no hope in the popular vote.

It's not clear that there actually are 7 million votes outstanding - some are provisional ballots, so may or may not be counted, and some are postal ballots requested but not returned. The map on the BBC site suggests the two states with most votes still to count are California and NY, with perhaps 2.5 million between them. Biden will get over 1.5 million of these based on the votes so far in those states.

No way is Trump getting anywhere near that many ballots invalidated. He doesn't need to though, just needs to focus on Pa and some of Mi, Wi, Az, Nv.

GSC wrote:Probably for the same reason as the EC, on the off chance Trump gets all mail in ballots invalidated or something.

Quick check of one bookie has the win market taken down now. You might also be limited in how much.

Yep it appears this is probably it - I was looking at a betting market called Smarkets - which had closed the main win market but had kept the popular vote open for betting. I'm now looking at another market (Betfair Exchange), they've also got the PV market trading at the same odds but they've actually kept their "Next President" market open which still has Trump at 10/1 (somewhat worryingly).

Not massively familiar but isn't that the one where people can set their own markets