US election 2020 thread

[Streathamite]

You caught me! Yes, I've been watching British sit-coms. Our public broadcast station carries them on Saturdays.

Blimey, Dads Army in the States

 

[planetgeli]

As far as I know, and I could be wrong, bookies work on an 'overound' which guarantees whatever the outcome they win. So in a two horse race if they get a lot of money for A they will lengthen the odds of B to get more bets on B thereby limiting their exposure. Put briefly, the odds on Biden and Trump are not their guess of who is going to win, its a purely financial formula reflective of the bets they have had at that point.

It doesn't guarantee it. It's very difficult to make a perfect book. It does, however, put the percentages in their favour.

(For my sins I worked for William Hill for 2 years back in the day).

 

[Wilf]

I don't know about that - I'm just sceptical of there being any link between childhood bullying and political affiliation later on in life. Those kinds of links are usually made by people who are still bitter about the hard time they had as a kid, and want bullies & bullying to be an indication of something deeper than it actually is.

Next you'll be saying bullies don't go on to be cops.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Blimey, Dads Army in the States

They only play the highest quality entertainment on PBS.

 

[Wilf]

Whilst we are on the topic of betting, what are the odds of Trump not attending Biden's inauguration? Very high I'd say.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Biden is 2/5 on atm btw. That's where the value is. Not a very sexy bet, though.

 

[planetgeli]

Whilst we are on the topic of betting, what are the odds of Trump not attending Biden's inauguration? Very high I'd say.

Though in betting terms you'd mean very low. We say the odds are high on something when we think it will happen (as you did). But high odds are high numbers, 33/1 etc. Bookies offer low number odds on 'certainties'.

And that's all because...odds are percentages. And it is indeed the percentages that are high on a 'sure thing'.

Example. 2/1 = 33.3%

33/1 = 2.94%

 

[planetgeli]

Biden is 2/5 on atm btw. That's where the value is. Not a very sexy bet, though.

1/2 widely available.

Clinton was 4/9 (an even slightly stronger favourite) when she lost.

Be careful what you bet for.

 

[two sheds]

Mind you a tenner at 25/1 on Trump would be worthwhile as the only thing to cheer you up if he wins on the night.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

1/2 widely available.

Clinton was 4/9 (an even slightly stronger favourite) when she lost.

Be careful what you bet for.

This is why I don't gamble. I know I will think I'm good at it...

 

[Lord Camomile]

Though in betting terms you'd mean very low. We say the odds are high on something when we think it will happen (as you did). But high odds are high numbers, 33/1 etc. Bookies offer low number odds on 'certainties'.

And that's all because...odds are percentages. And it is indeed the percentages that are high on a 'sure thing'.

Example. 2/1 = 33.3%

33/1 = 2.94%

Chances are high, odds are low.

 

[killer b]

If I was a betting man I'd put money on him attending tbh

 

[Streathamite]

If I was a betting man I'd put money on him attending tbh

I would hope he would have enough decency and maturity to.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I would hope he would have enough decency and maturity to.

Oh I would hope he'd storm off in a massive sulk and play golf on the day or something.

 

[Streathamite]

Oh I would hope he'd storm off in a massive sulk and play golf on the day or something.

Agreed - that would be funny!

 

[two sheds]

Tweeting how small the crowds were.

 

[maomao]

I think that what bimble is possibly referring to is that the psychology of the whole Trump thing is more akin to a religious cult than most political movements.
i'm guessing, mind.

It's a poor man's cult of personality. ie. he'd like a cult of personality but it's hard when 80% of the country thinks you're an arsehole.

 

[killer b]

I would hope he would have enough decency and maturity to.

He doesn't have any decency or maturity, but he'll still attend.

 

[Streathamite]

It's a poor man's cult of personality. ie. he'd like a cult of personality but it's hard when 80% of the country thinks you're an arsehole.

yep, true!
(although, tragically it's probably more like 65%)

 

[maomao]

yep, true!
(although, tragically it's probably more like 65%)

You're only counting active voters again. Pretty sure he's not that popular with non-voters, kids, felons and undocumented immigrants. You might not need them for an election but you'd need them for a cult of personality.

 

[Streathamite]

You're only counting active voters again. Pretty sure he's not that popular with non-voters, kids, felons and undocumented immigrants. You might not need them for an election but you'd need them for a cult of personality.

Ok, yes, see your point. I certainly did discount them.

 

[NoXion]

Seems pretty obvious to me that Trumpism would be appealing to bullies.

 

[two sheds]

Log In ‹ Dr. Janja Lalich — WordPress

cultresearch.org

For comparison: some yes, some no, some shared by other political parties and groups and religions of course.

• The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader, and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
• Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
• Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, or debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
• The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (e.g., members must get permission to date, change jobs, or marry—or leaders prescribe what to wear, where to live, whether to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
• The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and its members (e.g., the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
• The group has a polarized, us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
• The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders, or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
• The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (e.g., lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
• The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and control members. Often this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
• Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
• The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
• The group is preoccupied with making money.
• Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
• Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
• The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave—or even consider leaving—the group.

10 to 12 out of 15 I'd say, not quite up there with scientology which that would be a good one to compare against.

 

[MickiQ]

Whilst we are on the topic of betting, what are the odds of Trump not attending Biden's inauguration? Very high I'd say.

I can't imagine him attending, apart from the fact I'm sure he is a bad loser, there's no way he can make it about him which is the most important thing in the world in his eyes.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

ermm - why?

Because you can’t ascribe the disparate elements that made up his vote last time with any homogeneous descriptor. It’s lazy.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Not quite, though. If twice as much money is going on Trump than Biden, they will lose out if Trump wins. They have taken the view that Trump is more unlikely to win than the odds they're offering, so they conclude that the offer has value to them, but bookies can and do lose on particular races/events.

eg

If they are offering 2-1 on Trump and 1-2 on Biden and have taken £4 on Trump and £2 on Biden, they win £3 if Biden wins, and they lose £6 if Trump wins. So they just need to think that the odds on Trump winning are worse than 2-1 to see value in making that offer. (And to have the £6 in the kitty to cover the payout if they lose.)

As I say, I don’t understand betting. I managed about half of that My basic point was that bookies lay off bets on A by offering better odds on B. So what we can say is that they have had a lot of bets on Biden, rather than the bookies have had a meeting, analysed the psephological data and decided they they think Biden is doing to win.

 

[two sheds]

Because you can’t ascribe the disparate elements that made up his vote last time with any homogeneous descriptor. It’s lazy.

Not sure that's definitive - I don't think you can for any cult, certainly not something like scientology which as as I say I think compares. .

 

[Yossarian]

So Trump held a rally in Omaha - which in itself shows where his campaign is at that he's worried the single EC vote in the district will cost him the election - and someone didn't pay the bus company to give them a ride home. Result is emergency services attending hundreds of freezing seniors stranded miles from their vehicles.

Apparently polls suggest he's not competitive in the district any more and he'll be even less so now he's intent on killing his remaining supporters

These are hardcore Trump supporters - those that survive the freeze, and the subsequent infections when the coronavirus ravages their weakened systems, will find a way to blame Hillary Clinton for the debacle.

 

[Streathamite]

Because you can’t ascribe the disparate elements that made up his vote last time with any homogeneous descriptor. It’s lazy.

I wasn't suggesting you could, and I'm sure there are many different reasons why different people voted trump (examples: the wealthy for the tax cuts, the fossil fuels industry-dependent people for his war on all things green, the loyalists because they always vote GOP, the evangelicals for attacks on gays and abortion, the racists for obvious reasons, the anyone-b ut-Hillary mob ditto, and the b.luecollar vote in the swing states out of desperation as much as anything else), but I was referring to that minority segment of his support who are the hardcore Trump ultras, the fanatics, for whom their man can never, ever be wrong. Their relationship with Trump smacks strongly of cultism to me.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

As I say, I don’t understand betting. I managed about half of that My basic point was that bookies lay off bets on A by offering better odds on B. So what we can say is that they have had a lot of bets on Biden, rather than the bookies have had a meeting, analysed the psephological data and decided they they think Biden is doing to win.

Some do exactly that. It's a mix of the two.

What are the odds? An insider perspective from the political betting market

I can’t speak for counterparts at other bookmakers, but I spend a great deal of time researching my markets. I attend lectures, speak to politicians, network with political journalists, and show sympathy to civil servants as they whinge about their department’s latest policy, never mind the television, press, and Twitter research that any good political nerd will do. And I do this because I know that this gives me the best possible chance of being ahead the curve. Yes, £3m has been traded on Betfair, but the price it has settled at is very much an average of all the bets placed. Thousands of people form that market – some politically much better informed than the average politics trader I’m sure, but a great many aren’t. It’s like the “wisdom of crowds” and a big pig. If you asked a handful of people to guess its weight you could have guesses ranging from 5 stone to 10 stone. Ask 1,000 people and the average guess will probably settle on an answer vaguely close to the pig’s weight. Political traders like myself ought to be like metaphorical pig farmers who could accurately guess the pig’s weight within a few pounds. Well, that’s the theory.

However, in this instance, it does appear that more bets are being placed on Trump but that bigger bets are being placed on Biden, so it's not the case that more money is going on Trump.