Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting strategy if for some reason Trump or Clinton ar
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting strategy if for some reason Trump or Clinton aren’t candidates on election day
Paddy Power have markets up on whether Trump or Clinton won’t be their party’s Presidential candidate on election day. After all there has been speculation about Trump quitting the race (or the GOP trying to replace him.)
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Gold for JackW - First ..
I think Hillary Clinton will be elected, and become, POTUS. But there ought to be a thingy for the odds of what might happen after 20th January 2017: I think there is a substantial possibility that she will (a) serve only one term, and not seek re-election for a second; (b) be impeached and removed from office; (c) resign due to legal difficulties; (d) resign due to poor health; (e) die in office. All of these possibilities are far more likely for Hillary than for any other normal modern POTUS.
After checking the replays of the thread again and finding nothing obviously untoward JackW has been DQ for an irregular handing over from the overnight thread to the morning thread.
If Hillary is successful in November she will be the first Democrat to follow a strictly two term predecessor since Martin van Buren won in 1840 following Andrew Jackson.
I am as green as a diving pool with envy!
Just one gold ahead of the Chinese. Last day of competition today.
FPT: I for one agree with Sadiq Khan that Sadiq Khan's judgement, in putting Corbyn on the ballot in the first place, has been shown to be utterly atrocious.
The evidence provided has been reviewed in light of the the claimed ARSE movement and an official response from committee is as follows;
It was found that although the said ARSE movement may have been "regular" and without use of any medicinal or natural enhancement the final "movement" was outside the area allocated for this process although fortunately on this occasion we don't have any video evidence to back it up. ( just like last time) . Judges have also reserved judgement on the Brazilian but did take take the rather unusual placement of a tattoo fully into account.
Www.breakingwindnews/olympics16/latest.
It was a close shave but I went for it in the end ....
http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/the-olympics-medals-table-brexiters-dont-want-you-to-see--WkSTPZqqDZ
On that basis, if we were part of an Earth team, we would win all the medals and all future medals.
Rejoice.
I think this could only happen if there was a similtaneous death, such as a bomb in the debates.
Presumably it does show the total number of golds the EU could have won with a proper selection process. It would be interesting to see how many fewer silvers and bronzes the EU team would have won; how many fewer athletes would have competed (and which countries would have lost the most athletes); and what percentage of the EU team and total EU medals would have been courtesy of the GB division.
I hope someone's bored enough to work it out!
For those who have better imaginations than me, I would lay Donald Trump now and wait for the Betfair prices to move a bit in the hope of laying Hillary Clinton at an opportune moment to create a green position on both main candidates and a supergreen position on everyone else. (If you think that Donald Trump's price is likely to shorten in the short term, you should of course do it the other way around.) That way you don't have to worry about picking the wrong long shot.
Right now, however, I would prefer simply to be laying Donald Trump. His campaign looks adrift right now.
It is not just the Islamic world, and Indian subcontinent underrepresented, so is all of africa (bar long distance runners) Latin America and South East Asia.
His "medical report" is typical of his campaign:
http://europe.newsweek.com/donald-trump-health-doctor-490836
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/datablog/2012/jul/30/olympics-2012-alternative-medal-table
Edit - looks like it's updated here for 2016
https://landing.google.com/altmedaltable/results/
I see Simon Timson - head of UK Sport has some ambitious plans for Tokyo - apparently shooting is a sport with lots of medals to grab. Archery and badminton funding cut due to poor performance too. “We fund approximately 1,400 athletes on world-class programme funding, of which around 60% are what we call ‘podium potential athletes’.
1400! And 700 that are already tipped for a bright future. Wow. Just 10% would storm Rio2016 results.
Hilary Clinton is no Harry Truman. If she does win, it is very improbable that she will win the nomination again in 2020, even if she gets that far (goodness knows she found it hard enough this time).
However, I would suggest under this scenario the value is in placing a bet, on about the 30th January, on Tim Kaine to be the next President, because it seems unlikely the Republicans will return to sanity in the next election and the barriers to Hilary even completing her term are fairly high,
Skimming through Wikipedia from 1900 I make it 4 wins, 4 losses. The 22nd Amendment cut-off gives you 1 win and 4 losses, but that's not much evidence that the challenger is favoured given how teensy the sample was, especially when you consider that one of the losses was basically a draw.
So it's the massive boxer with the degree in Fine Art for our last nail-biter?
The other way to bet against trump/clinton being on the ballot, is to lay both on betfair. The market assigns somewhere between a 2-3% chance that someone other than Clinton or Trump will be POTUS, so you could lay both now, then lay whoever replaces the dropped-out candidate to equalise your winnings.
Anyway, big news is.... Sam Wang pretty much called it for Clinton a few hours ago;
http://election.princeton.edu/
Somewhere between 1/20 & 1/10, he thinks.
I don't see someone with Hillary's drive for the office simply giving it up although the chances of political, legal or health problems forcing her hand are not insignificant. She may end up, like Truman or Johnson, withdrawing after performing poorly in the primaries.
I am the Lord JackW and on the Sabbath day you shall not take the name of the ARSE in vain and you shall not bear false witness to the ARSE and covet no other.
Honour Smithson, the father and his son of PB, that your days may be long upon the site which the Lord JackW and his ARSE doth also give you much profit.
Euro Guido
The Remainers house journal went to press before Brexit Britain won Olympic gold. Not as smart as they think. https://t.co/b8hzwE529r
http://predictwise.com/blog/2016/08/uscla-times-interesting-and-exciting-but-not-too-believable/
tl;dr: They've got a single panel, weighted by previous vote recall, so they're polling the same people repeatedly. Previous vote recall is unreliable and their sample is probably wonky, but pay attention to it as a way to pick up trends quickly.
Logistics notwithstanding and ignoring the actuarial possibilities which could be applied to anyone in any situation, Trump is not so far behind as to make his removal from the ticket an inevitability. In any case, this is not about changing the leader of the party, the role of candidate is more nebulous than that.
Not a bet for me. The more interesting potential "black swan" would be if Gary Johnson got into the debates but he's not going to make it I suspect.
Congratulations to all our Olympians, whether successful or not and congratulations to all who take part - the moments or minutes of competition we see obscure months and years of dedication and training we don't.
As a gambler who has walked close to the line of addiction in my time, I have some real concerns about the Lottery particularly the Scratchcards but if the money I and millions of others have poured into it in the last 20 years has been an integral factor in our success, I'll give myself a pat on the back.
Perhaps Camelot can fund the Olympic Parades we seem destined to have.
I've not commented much on the Labour leadership - I'm not a member or supporter of Labour and they can have as leader whomsoever they democratically choose.
Corbyn's comment about the UK not militarily intervening if the Russians invade one of the Baltic States was however a comment I couldn't pass. Owen Smith's comment about negotiating with ISIS is silly - the salient point is ISIS don't negotiate with anyone so the entire point is moot.
Corbyn on the other hand was directly undermining the key point of British defence and security policy since 1949 - an attack on one member of NATO is an attack on all members. Rightly or wrongly, we are pledged to defend Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (not the Ukraine) and their inclusion under the NATO umbrella provides the sole guarantee of their continued independence from Moscow. Without a guarantee, they are at risk of being overrun as they were in 1940.
There is a wider question being asked (Trump is asking it too) about the role of NATO and many will ask if risking nuclear annihilation to save Tallinn or Riga is really something we should be doing - are they "far off countries of which we know nothing ?" Unfortunately, whether they are or not, unless we eject them from NATO, we are committed to their defence (as we are Turkey as well).
*I know he served fifteen months of Kennedy's term too.
I don’t think Smith was advocating or even expecting negotiations any time soon.
Congratulations to the team and to the Brazillians for doing their bit.
Bobby Kennedy effectively only entered the 1968 race after Johnson had decided to withdraw. So it's a McCarthy you should be looking for.
I am pleased you are so sanguine about the prospects for international peace with an erratic and unstable adventurer like Hilary Clinton at the helm. I must confess I am less optimistic, although hopefully no tangle she causes will be as disastrous as Vietnam.
But really the problem seems to be that smith has turned out to be a bit of a prat.
The real question will be how the GOP manages defeat - Stodge's Second Law of Politics states that how a Party deals a defeat is more important than how it deals with victory.
The US system allows for a clean slate in a way the British system doesn't. A Party can come back four years after a later with a completely new candidate espousing completely different policies and the process by which this has happened has gone virtually unnoticed.
We are always told (especially by the pro-GOP supporters on here) about the wealth of talent in the GOP ranks (yet they chose Trump). Ryan would be the obvious choice especially if he remains Speaker for a couple more years and would be barely 50 in 2020.
As an aside, IF Trump wins, I'd expect a midterm bloodbath for the GOP losing both the Senate and the House (a reverse 1994 if you like).
Thank you oh great Lord for personally opening the great tome to show a lesser mortal where these great words are written
http://tinyurl.com/jjsloee
I'll get my coat, as I'm due to be playing the organ directly...
Ukraine is like the old Yugoslavia. In the absence of a truly exceptional leader, the Ukraine is simply not, long term, sustainable as a country. The differences between the West and the East of the Ukraine are too great.
Everyone I know both in Russia and in the Ukraine expects this country to split in two. A war is coming in the Ukraine, probably within the next few years.
I see no reason why we should meddle into it. In fact, we should be encouraging the Ukraine to accept the inevitable and to split into two rather more viable states, which could pursue different long-term strategies.
Corbyn’s comments do make some sense in this context.
We should not allow NATO to be dragged into wars protecting the (artificial) boundaries of the old Soviet states in the former USSR.
Vietnam saw U.S. ground troops facing fatalities and casualties every day and most young Americans send over their because of the draft, the U.S. is not involved in any conflict on that scale today and especially after withdrawing ground troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. Whatever Hillary does I cannot see her invoking the draft again even if she sent ground troops into Syria, Libya or the Baltic States or South Korea
It is not in any way comparable toYugoslavia, where several different ethnic groups were uneasily amalgamated into one state. Northern Ireland would be the nearest parallel, or perhaps the Israeli settlements on the West Bank. But what happened in Ukraine was a hell of a lot nastier than what happened to the Ulster Irish or even the Palestinians. Until you understand that, you won't understand the extent of the problem. Crimea, which was after all part of Russia until 1954, was a very different matter.
It may have to split in the end. But that will still be a naked land-grab by Russia, albeit one that the current country didn't instigate and merely took advantage of.
I also think you underestimate the real fear that Putin is after first the Donbass, and next, the Ukraine. Remember that originally Russia *was* what is now the Ukraine, and the first capital of Rus was Kiev. Putin may well want to emulate Lenin and Trotsky by seizing an independent Ukraine and incorporating it back into a Russian Empire that had surrendered it very reluctantly in the first place.
@georgeeaton: George Galloway on why Respect has deregistered itself: "because we support Corbyn's Labour Party".
Given where we are, I think it is pointless trying to maintain the territorial integrity of a state that cannot work.
I think the country that will become Eastern Ukraine will end up including the Donbass.
As for the point about Corbyn's comments making some sense in contexts, well everyone makes a little sense now and then. Corbyn is the ultimate broken clock, his positions are fixed, new events are slotted into existed positions without any hesitation (we know this to be the case since the inflexibility of his ideology, which informs those views, is a key part of his appeal), and sometimes he will even be right, but for the wrong reasons.
And, if the current leadership of Belarus wasn’t pre-Russian, would we be seeing a Ukraine-type situation there.
https://youtu.be/YMHOcmDVBP0
Good day all.
""I wasn't lying to a certain extent. I over-exaggerated what was happening to me," he said."
The demographics that are trending democrat will still be going that way so the Republicans will need a far more appealing candidate next time round. I think they will learn some important lessons from this year about not having an overcrowded field etc. It's difficult to contemplate what else they might do, as to who might wander through their nomination process that's really unclear. One name I'd expect to see in 2020 running is Nikki Haley, she'll be under 50 still and for a southern republican she actually seems sane.
It is a newly emerged state, so much the same as Poland in 1919, which was by and large part of the Russian Empire too, albeit with some parts from Austria and Germany too.
West Ukraine was Hapsburg Galicia, and going back further much of West Ukraine was also part of the Grand Duchy of Poland and Lithuania, with Crimea and other parts under Ottoman control.
East Ukraine only really developed in 19th and early twentieth centuries with Russian agricultural and military settlements then the industrialisation of the late Czarist and Soviet periods.
It is not for us to partition the country, and I think it quite unclear how much any part of the Ukraine really wants to be part of Putin's empire. West Ukraine certainly does not want that, and East Ukraine is ambivalent at best.
Personally, I would far rather have Russia onside with NATO to face the common enemy of Islamism.
Sabre rattling over this has got quite serious once more:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-18/separatist-shelling-kills-most-ukrainian-soldiers-in-a-year
[Assuming you're not suggesting free movement should include Russia].
I think it was idiotic for NATO to invite/accept the 'boundary states' as members. Any fool could see that it would threaten Russia's perceived security, just as the USA over-reacted to Cuba.
BTW Finland was invaded by the Soviet Union during WW2 but is now neutral. I don't think anyone would be so stupid as to ask Finland to become a NATO member; why are we different with regard to the Baltic states?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Finland_during_World_War_II