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

[aftershavedave]

This thread will already have been reported by the "owner" of the best, bigly thread in the universe on the election, so let's wave goodbye now

 

[Greg Bobkin]

He won't do the job. He will quickly pardon himself from all the charges he's now facing, and will appoint a few more judges that will cement his inviolate security, then he will just prat around till he's forced out of office (which he won't be because his party will be happy to do what they like while he occasionally comments favourably; it is possible to be almost completely nonfunctioning and 'run' America; see Ronald Reagan).

Yeah, but at least he's a CHARACTER

 

[jcdenton08]

Not as far as I know - He was responding to my posts a few days ago!

Nothing personal old bean, was just having a bit of a break Apologies for duplicating your thread!

 

[beorhthelm]

oops, misread.

 

[Bozza]

I'm not sure why people place SO much faith, if you can call it that, in betting markets that fluctuate so wildly (as everyone knows).

What do you mean by this?

I'm not suggesting, "The betting markets currently say that Trump has a 60% probability to win, therefore he will win".

I.01 shots, the shortest odds possible on Betfair - with an implied probability of 99% - get turned over. It doesn't mean the odds were wrong, it means the 1% chance happened, as will be the case around 1 time out of every 100.

The betting exchanges offer a near-perfect marketplace.

Exchanges are open to manipulation, but it would take significant sums of money, and I remain to be convinced of the outcome achieved.

For a start, most people will have no idea what the betting markets are saying - it's just not a part of their life nor the conversations they partake in.

Secondly, if you do want the media to be reporting "Trump is the favourite" why would you keep backing in further than required. Trump 1.9 / 2.1 Harris gets you a "Trump is favourite" position, why get Trump down to c1.6?

Finally, how does anyone know whether a message that "Trump is favourite" will motivate the Democratic vote - "It's important we vote now" or dissuade it - "there's no point in voting now"?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Just leaving for Downing Street now...

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't get this need from people for 'personalities' or 'characters' in positions of power. Not just in politics, the same goes for football, business, music, whatever.

If someone is good at what they do, just let them get on with it

I was commenting on the thought processes of much of most electorates.

I have less of a grasp about whether Harris is any good at her job than I have a grasp on how charismatic and nimble-minded she appears to be.

I was happy to back Starmer based on his employment record and moderate sounding policies.

I would certainly back Harris were I to have a vote there. But she hasn't shone. Trump isn't a 'Nazi'. He doesn't have any political doctrine.

Her main strength is she isn't Trump. And this will be seen as a weakness by many Americans, even if they are too inarticulate or particularly interested to explain themselves.

 

[Bozza]

Beyond Trump's odds shortening, having read the last few pages of this thread, it's slightly depressing that there are still some who seem to believe that "Trump won't be that bad", as if the insurrection didn't happen, as if most/all those who worked closest with him believe him to be a dangerous idiotic fascist, as if he hadn't been found guilty of numerous crimes, as if with the world in a very fragile geopolitical position including multiple wars playing out he would be the very worst kind of influence.

As someone else said - I can feel myself sinking into a Brexit-like gloom.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yeah, but at least he's a CHARACTER

I wasn't defending him.

You have a habit of getting needlessly carried away with your half-formed impression of what I am going on about

 

[Chicken Run]

Nothing personal old bean, was just having a bit of a break Apologies for duplicating your thread!

lol so you whacked poor old Zeb on ignore for a break

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Why should countries rely on the states?

It’s a good job we did, in 1917 and 1941. We needed food, fuel and armaments.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Beyond Trump's odds shortening, having read the last few pages of this thread, it's slightly depressing that there are still some who seem to believe that "Trump won't be that bad", as if the insurrection didn't happen, as if most/all those who worked closest with him believe him to be a dangerous idiotic fascist as if he hadn't been found guilty of numerous crimes, as if with the world in a very fragile geopolitical position including multiple wars playing out he would be the very worst kind of influence.

As someone else said - I can feel myself sinking into a Brexit-like gloom.

I feel the same way. It’s going to be turbulent either way.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

What do you mean by this?

I'm not suggesting, "The betting markets currently say that Trump has a 60% probability to win, therefore he will win".

I.01 shots, the shortest odds possible on Betfair - with an implied probability of 99% - get turned over. It doesn't mean the odds were wrong, it means the 1% chance happened, as will be the case around 1 time out of every 100.

The betting exchanges offer a near-perfect marketplace.

Exchanges are open to manipulation, but it would take significant sums of money, and I remain to be convinced of the outcome achieved.

For a start, most people will have no idea what the betting markets are saying - it's just not a part of their life nor the conversations they partake in.

Secondly, if you do want the media to be reporting "Trump is the favourite" why would you keep backing in further than required. Trump 1.9 / 2.1 Harris gets you a "Trump is favourite" position, why get Trump down to c1.6?

Finally, how does anyone know whether a message that "Trump is favourite" will motivate the Democratic vote - "It's important we vote now" or dissuade it - "there's no point in voting now"?

I'm not a betting man, so most of what you posted goes straight over my head.

What I meant was that I can't understand how people can take odds seriously when they fluctuate massively on a seemingly daily basis. A load of recent polls have the two neck and neck - and yet reports of 'a big swing' are enough to convince people that Trump is now DEFIANTLY going to win. That's mental - to me, anyway.

I'm not saying it will or won't happen, but basing your conclusion to a presidential race PURELY on the odds given by a bookmaker, is a bit weird, no?

 

[jcdenton08]

I was commenting on the thought processes of much of most electorates.

I have less of a grasp about whether Harris is any good at her job than I have a grasp on how charismatic and nimble-minded she appears to be.

I was happy to back Starmer based on his employment record and moderate sounding policies.

I would certainly back Harris were I to have a vote there. But she hasn't shone. Trump isn't a 'Nazi'. He doesn't have any political doctrine.

Her main strength is she isn't Trump. And this will be seen as a weakness by many Americans, even of they are too inarticulate or particularly interested to explain themselves.

Trump might not be a Nazi, but he certainly has made statements which sound very much like textbook fascism.

“During the initial remarks made on Friday, which caused outrage and alarm among his critics, Trump told the crowd to “get out and vote, just this time”, adding that “you won’t have to do it any more. Four more years, you know what? It’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote any more, my beautiful Christians.”

Add to that his admiration for Putin, a defacto dictator, and numerous other examples I can’t be bothered to list, he’s certainly got ambitions to “reform” the role of President…

 

[Mellotron]

Secondly, if you do want the media to be reporting "Trump is the favourite" why would you keep backing in further than required. Trump 1.9 / 2.1 Harris gets you a "Trump is favourite" position, why get Trump down to c1.6?

Because they want it to look like it was rigged.

Trump recently said at a rally "I shouldn't tell you this, but I've seen the polling data, I've seen the polling data and it's not even close. We're going to win huge etc"

Building the narrative that a Harris win is completely unfathomable, and CLEARLY dodgy.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yeah of all the shit that nasty narcissist had come out with, that one I'm ok with. He was just telling people to pay their share.

Or else. Can you not see the threat?

 

[Bozza]

I'm not a betting man, so most of what you posted goes straight over my head.

What I meant was that I can't understand how people can take odds seriously when they fluctuate massively on a seemingly daily basis. A load of recent polls have the two neck and neck - and yet reports of 'a big swing' are enough to convince people that Trump is now DEFIANTLY going to win. That's mental - to me, anyway.

I'm not saying it will or won't happen, but basing your conclusion to a presidential race PURELY on the odds given by a bookmaker, is a bit weird, no?

But that was my first point: I'm not, and I can see no evidence that anyone else is.

But I do take betting markets as a guide to probability, so as someone who is #TeamHarris, I can't help feeling worried seeing Trump is currently a warm favourite.

Hopefully, that will change as more data/information/exit polls come into the public domain, shaping the market in favour of Harris.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

I wasn't defending him.

You have a habit of getting needlessly carried away with your half-formed impression of what I am going on about

I wasn't implying that you were! I do GENUINELY think he is a character. Anyone who doesn't think he has a bigger public personality than Harris is mad. You only have to look at the way the two of them act at their respective rallies.

 

[schmunk]

I'm not a betting man, so most of what you posted goes straight over my head.

What I meant was that I can't understand how people can take odds seriously when they fluctuate massively on a seemingly daily basis. A load of recent polls have the two neck and neck - and yet reports of 'a big swing' are enough to convince people that Trump is now DEFIANTLY going to win. That's mental - to me, anyway.

I'm not saying it will or won't happen, but basing your conclusion to a presidential race PURELY on the odds given by a bookmaker, is a bit weird, no?

I'm not a betting man either but to put my money where my mouth is I've just opened an account and backed Harris to win for £50 @ 2.5 (5/2)...

 

[Titanic]

Mod: Merged - sorry had to delete the poll from the second thread.