Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden moving back up on the Betfair WH2020 “next president” ma
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden moving back up on the Betfair WH2020 “next president” market
The recent spate of good national and state polls for Joe Biden has led to something of a turnaround in the betting. After a long period when the Trump position got a better and better things seemed to have changed with punters now more ready to risk their cash on a Biden victory.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In that case I take back everything I ever said, in light of this new and shocking development that James O'Brien is upset about Brexit I recant my politics, my philosophy and everything I have ever said on this subject. If James O'Brien is unhappy then we have really reached Defcon 1 and it is time to rethink everything.
Josh Mendelsohn, the CEO of the Democratic data and analytics firm Hawkfish, warned of a situation in which the vote count on election night could show a massive victory for Trump.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/515191-democrats-sound-alarm-on-possible-election-chaos
Everything lasts only as long as all parties want it to last and can be rescinded or replaced when any party loses interest. That is why sensible treaty writers ensure that the deal is one all parties will want to keep ongoing.
If we want to agree something, chew it up and then spit it out once its served its purpose then that's life. Next time anyone agrees a deal with the UK maybe they should ensure its one the UK won't lose interest in after 12 months?
I've decided to take some of it off...
In 2018, on the night, the story was "Hugely disapointing foer the Democrats, Trump is indomitably strong"
After all the votes were counted "Oh, it was a Blue wave"
In the Senate 2018 was a hugely disappointing night for the Democrats, going backwards.
I can see it ending up more Democrat than Ohio and Iowa but probably not Georgia, Florida and North Carolina so I'd have thought the fewest ECVs Biden could realistically gain TX with would be 372.
Fivethirtyeight identifies a slightly more extreme scenario where PA, NH, MN and NE-2 are GOP and TX goes red. That's 337 ECVs and as far as you can credibly stretch underlying 2020 state swing - any other scenario of TX going blue with fewer ECVs is sub 1%.
https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/august-2020-presidential-race-tightens-after-party-conventions
Unfortunately, he can't help himself.
https://twitter.com/sistoney67/status/1302927837175984128?s=21
I can't support things that impinge upon the UK's integrity and honour.
If this year the postal votes and in-person votes are not properly weighted together when the exit polls are anounced, this could considerably distort the voting in western states.
But you are right, of course. This kind of nihilism is not going to help us either build a happier country or a more prosperous one.
Or at least that's what some believe...
The SC could only overrule Boris last year as Boris did not have the majority in Parliament he needed to pass key statutes
We were explicit that we would be looking to make new arrangements after the transition. The Europeans wanted to sequence talks this way, we were quite clear we didn't. The Europeans can't pretend to be shocked and horrified now that the UK has issues with how things were done, that was always clear and they knew that when they sequenced talks this way.
They made this bed. They chose the sequencing. When they want to decide future arrangements we'll still be here but they chose to ensure the trade deal only lasted 12 months. Their choice, they can live with the consequences.
There's no mileage in abrogating from a treaty when our next 5 years is going to be spent signing trade treaties with 50-60 other countries.
TL;DR "I couldn't care less how you think we look"
I want the UK government to look after UK interests. Just as the EUs governments are answerable to their voters not you or me.
No prizes for guessing...
To see oursels as ithers see us!
Under the UK constitution a PM with no majority is virtually powerless as May was and Boris was last year, a PM with a big majority in the Commons though as Boris has now is a virtual dictator until the next election
The UK government will simply not impose a border in the Irish Sea between NI and GB if No Deal now it seems
https://dl.ncsbe.gov/index.html?prefix=Press/NC Absentee Ballot Requests for 2020 General Election/
My take on State Aid (where I agree the UK has some cause for concern) is that if we want to push our case with the EU we should have bloody well worked out what our proposition is by now, and discussed the surveillance and oversight mechanisms on top too.
We know from the Government hasn't bothered yet as it's still "debating" it (which is code for Cummings hasn't decided and dictated to Boris what it should be yet) so hence the schoolboy like diplomacy and smoke & mirrors.
Anything that happens afterwards will be fraud as far as his supporters are concerned.
I can see armed Trump militia trying to stop the counting of mail ballots.
Ladbrokes are quoting just 3.5 on Biden winning Texas. That looks to me a very poor bet, compared with backing Biden on the spreads.
My reasoning is simple. If Texas goes blue, then the very strong likelihood is that Biden will also have won all the 'Lean Dem' states and the tossup states, using the Cook Report categorisations:
https://cookpolitical.com/sites/default/files/2020-07/EC Ratings.072320.2.pdf?
That totals 351 ECVs without Texas. If he wins Texas, that's 389, and he'd also have had a good chance of winning Iowa and Ohio in such a scenario. So a bet on Biden winning Texas is a bet on Biden getting probably at least 380 and possibly over 400.
The current SPIN buy price (provided you use the supremacy market, which for some reason has half the effective spread of the main Biden ECV market), is 29.5 supremacy, corresponding to Biden 283.75, Trump 254.25. So your upside if Texas flips is equivalent to something like 100 ECVs, maybe more.
But the Biden supremacy bet also wins, albeit not so bigly, all the way down through Biden losing all of Cook's 'toss-up' states (GA, NC, AZ, ME-02). He could also lose FL as well and your losses would be small.
This is not a symmetrical risk, it seems to me: on the spreads you're in profit for a good hunk of the probability distribution, and in super-profits if Texas flips.
As ever: this is not investment advice. Do your own research. Spread betting is dangerous. You might lose your shirt etc etc.
Biden will win because Trump is a reckless amoral demagogue that needs stopping to save the US constitution and democracy, and restore sanity.
I expect the liberal intelligentsia to treat it as a crushing victory and a sign that they can all go back to business as normal, as they were before.
They will be about as right as the Bourbons were.
The HoL can only delay not block, the Commons will win ultimately
Trump can rant and rave as much as he likes, but if he loses the election, he's not going to be President on 21st January
Biden on election night, 'the mail in ballots are still being processed and I am getting most of them and I will not concede.'
A very likely scenario which could go on for weeks if not months and need the US Supreme Court to decide as it did in 2000
my son's school is seeing the first blindingly obvious problem with the current Covid strategy.
The Year 7s, who went back a day early on Wednesday last week, have been told that one of their number has tested positive for Covid 19. As a result the whole Year Group has to self isolate for 14 days. This is bearable but obviously disruptive for them, not least because they have only just started at the senior school.
The bigger problem for the school is that any of the teaching staff who were in contact with the boy (which for these [purposes means being in the same room) must also self isolate for 14 days. So straight away the teaching staff is being reduced for the rest of the school.
I don't see how this is going to be a sustainable policy in the medium to long term.
We are now entering the final phase of our negotiations with the EU.
The EU have been very clear about the timetable. I am too.
There needs to be an agreement with our European friends by the time of the European Council on 15 October.
If we can’t agree by then, then I do not see that there will be a free trade agreement between us, and we should both accept that and move on.
We’ll then have a trading arrangement with the EU like Australia’s.
I want to be absolutely clear that, as we have said right from the start, that would be a good outcome for the UK.
As a Government we’re preparing, at our borders and at our ports, to be ready for it.
We will have full control over our laws, our rules, and our fishing waters.
We will have the freedom to do trade deals with every country in the world. And we will prosper mightily as a result.
We will of course always be ready to talk to our EU friends even in these circumstances. Our door will never be closed and we will trade as friends and partners – but without a free trade agreement.
There is still an agreement to be had and we will continue to work hard in September to achieve it.
It is one based on our reasonable proposal for a standard free trade agreement like the one the EU has agreed with Canada and so many others.
Even at this late stage, if the EU are ready to rethink their current positions and agree this I will be delighted.
But we cannot and will not compromise on the fundamentals of what it means to be an independent country to get it.
That is the pledge I make to you. If you stand with me, I hope you’ll join our Party today, so we have the backing we need during this crucial phase of our negotiations >>
Become a Member
Yours sincerely,
Boris Johnson signature
Boris Johnson
Prime Minister
I'm not sure what to reply.
I reckon the Supreme Court would deal with this one in no time at all. You cannot pass laws which contradict existing statute without the existing statute being amended or falling.
Other than that the competitive states unpolled in the senate of 2018 were New Hampshire (Dem), North Carolina for the GOP. Colorado, Iowa, Georgia, Virginia are pretty much collectively a wash/uncompetitive and only really go in a strong victory for either side.
The most important states - PA, WI, MN, NV, MI, AZ and FL all had senate races.
There is scope for scuffles in one or two states about the vote counting which could go all the way to the Supreme Court, as in 2000, but that still requires the EC to be so close that it still makes a difference (as in 2000).
Of course eventually the govt can get their way (if their way is and stays what they were putting out there overnight).