[Politics] The 2024 US Election - *MATCH DAY*

[Greg Bobkin]

After reading about the Republican's Puerto Rico faux pas - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj7689v757o - I headed to Oddschecker to see what the curnend odds are.

My positive mood soon soured when I saw how short-priced Trump is currently.

I know some don't see any merit in betting markets, but they absolutely do provide the best guide on probability available to us.

Probability is all it is, of course, but the current odds give Trump twice the chance of winning of Harris, and that is utterly depressing.

All that doesn't really sit with the 'It's too close to call' narrative that seems to be trotted out all over the place. Including this, for example.

I get what you're saying - and it doesn't help that I think betting is a mug's game - but it doesn't take much to skew the markets. Just like with anything that comes out of Trump's mouth, I take all that with a lot more than a pinch of salt.

 

[nwgull]

Isn't it largely based on how much money is being put on each candidate?

That's all it's based on. It's all well and good when people from each side put their own spin on it to try and make out polling results are good for their respective candidate, but when it comes to punters putting putting money on their interpretation of the polls and general mood of the nation, the head tends to overall the heart.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Whatever happens, I would bet a HUGE amount of money he will attempt to claim victory on the night.

Not so unusual. Gore did that too. (And Bush claimed defeat!)

 

[nwgull]

Not so unusual. Gore did that too. (And Bush claimed defeat!)

I don't think Gore ever claimed victory, did he? He did concede defeat to Bush but then retracted that concession not long after.

 

[Mellotron]

That's all it's based on. It's all well and good when people from each side put their own spin on it to try and make out polling results are good for their respective candidate, but when it comes to punters putting putting money on their interpretation of the polls and general mood of the nation, the head tends to overall the heart.

Then it's utterly meaningless, or at least a very poor indicator compared to actual turnout, and poll of polls.

 

[Mellotron]

Not so unusual. Gore did that too. (And Bush claimed defeat!)

Understandable in that case as there was unquestionably fuckery afoot.

On election night, it was unclear who had won, with the electoral votes of the state of Florida still undecided. The returns showed that Bush won Florida by such a close margin that state law required a recount. A month-long series of legal battles led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount. Ultimately, Bush won Florida by 537 votes, a margin of 0.009%. The Florida recount and subsequent litigation resulted in major post-election controversy, with some analysis suggesting that limited county-based recounts would have confirmed a Bush victory, whereas a statewide recount would have given the state to Gore.[6][7] Post-election analysis has found that Palm Beach County's butterfly ballot misdirected over 2,000 votes from Gore to third-party candidate Pat Buchanan, tipping Florida—and the election—to Bush.[8]

With Trump it's a little different isn't it, given his pathological lying and desperation to gain and cling to power at any cost? Not exactly the same as Al Gore

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Not so unusual. Gore did that too. (And Bush claimed defeat!)

The lengths that Trump and his mob went to last time - and will go to again if they don't get the 'right' result - are WAY more extreme than any other candidate!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I imagine this will be repeated everywhere

 

[US Seagull]

That's all it's based on. It's all well and good when people from each side put their own spin on it to try and make out polling results are good for their respective candidate, but when it comes to punters putting putting money on their interpretation of the polls and general mood of the nation, the head tends to overall the heart.

That would usually be well and good, but here's my problem with that idea:

There has been heavy advertising on Trump friendly media ("Right-side Broadcasting Network" is a hack outfit pretending to be journalists but instead just uncritically covering everything Trump while heavily pushing Trump grifts next to their coverage) for betting on the election. I don't see this on MSNBC, or even any of the left-wing YouTube channels.

 

[Mellotron]

I imagine this will be repeated everywhere

Depressing.

Genuinely insane it's this close.

 

[nicko31]

The levels of disinformation already is staggering.

This country has been through a lot in the past decade, yet despite everything what is happening in the US is completely on another level.

The only decent outcome would be Trump being totally wiped out removing any challenge to the legitimacy of the ballot. The chances of this happening seem very slim.

 

[Is it PotG?]

 

[nwgull]

That would usually be well and good, but here's my problem with that idea:


View attachment 191446

There has been heavy advertising on Trump friendly media ("Right-side Broadcasting Network" is a hack outfit pretending to be journalists but instead just uncritically covering everything Trump while heavily pushing Trump grifts next to their coverage) for betting on the election. I don't see this on MSNBC, or even any of the left-wing YouTube channels.

So simple question to you: Have you put a large sum of your cash on a Harris win given these supposedly favourable odds?

 

[US Seagull]

So simple question to you: Have you put a large sum of your cash on a Harris win given these supposedly favourable odds?

No. Because I don't gamble. It's a mugs game.

 

[Triggaaar]

Trump supporters seem to be saying as they are not as far behind as 2020 it's a positive sign.

Which seems mental from the outside

I thought they won in 2020? So difficult to keep up

 

[Mellotron]

So simple question to you: Have you put a large sum of your cash on a Harris win given these supposedly favourable odds?

No because a Harris win certainly isn't guaranteed.

But a 66% likelihood of Trump winning is utter nonsense and has no basis in reality or any quantifiable metrics whatsoever.

 

[peterward]

Eh. He was turned down because he wanted to do 3 hours and she didn't want to travel to him

I think it's fair he wants the same time for both for fairness , but it's no real loss for her either

He turned her down allegedly, as she needed him to travel on Tuesday (today).

 

[nwgull]

No. Because I don't gamble. It's a mugs game.

Tony Bloom is a mug, is he?

 

[US Seagull]

Tony Bloom is a mug, is he?

Tony's a big boy. He can make his own decisions.

 

[Seagull58]

Answer me this honestly: are you prepared to put a decent wedge of cash on that? With Harris available at 2.7 on the exchanges, it would seem to be a no-brainer for a 2-horse race that you’re that confident about.