Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sporting Index have Biden on 281 Electoral College Votes in th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sporting Index have Biden on 281 Electoral College Votes in their opening spread betting markets
The Spread Betting firm SportingIndex has now got up its WH2020 markets and the early prices have Biden on 281 ECVs which is 11 above the number required.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Goodness, seems like it - anyway, 281 for Biden = rather too close for comfort. An honest assessment of his chances, or just a load of punters expecting something unrealistically close to 2016? I'd still be very surprised if he didn't win more comfortably.
https://www.sportingindex.com/training-centre/politics-spread-betting
I would be tempted to sell Biden at 278 with a small stake
I’m still not over buying Tory seats at 380 in 2017
I'm in anyway - I'm long of Biden EC supremacy at 28.
There is the fear of Biden going even more gaga.
There is the possibility of an early vaccine giving Trump a boost.
Odds are none of these will happen and Biden will win relatively comfortably but the uncertainty is high.
A great many of us do not have, and have never had through all of this mess, the luxury of working from home.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1301509210765692929
"No one," said Abbott, "however smart, however well-educated, however experienced … is the suppository of all wisdom."
I feel he'll fit in very well with the operation currently inserting unpleasant and ineffective medicine up the British bottom.
https://twitter.com/swin24/status/1301505935475724290?s=19
Oh, and the latest English hospitals summary for the pandemic so far is also out:
Younger (under 40): 235 (0.8% of total deaths)
Middle-aged (40-59): 2,299 (7.8%)
Older (60+): 27,051 (91.4%)
281. I buy, you sell. 50p unit stake.
I win, you pay Mermaids. You win, I pay your chosen charity - which could be you.
How does the proverb about riding a tiger go?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnbDZXoA78k
Wasn't a good look right before the election, this time round Trump has definitely had more episodes like that than Biden (Whose gaffes have been entirely verbal). Let's hope Joe doesn't 'overheat' any time soon.
How does it work in the USA? I think Trump's suggestion of voting both ways to test the system (although illegal) is an inspired way to really screw up the election. Presumably it will be a nightmare to unravel and presumably it won't just be Republicans that do it. I think this is his best attempt to mess it up. He could win illegitimately or lose and have a serious complaint about the validity of the election that could take forever to resolve.
If you buy a X, you need to sell at X+Spread to break even
If Y<Spread you still lose money
Oh, and FWIW, I reckon people being jammed in like sardines on these horrible disgusting trains was probably the single biggest source of transmission in the early phase of the pandemic, which goes a long way to explaining why London got clobbered so hard. Turning the clock back would therefore seem to be the pinnacle of stupidity.
I have rather plunged with SPIN on EC supremacy though. I think the big Biden win is being underestimated.
I think with me, because I thought Trump would lose even a year ago when things looked ostensibly rosier for him and he was a clear betting favourite, this is rather buttressing my confidence now. Of course I could be in for a shock - and with the spread bet on that would include financially!
Never again. Just not worth it. I managed to reduce my losses that time from what they could have been but still it was scary.
My best guess if the election were today is Biden at 324 with most of the risk on the downside for him.
I seem to recall reading elsewhere that the median age of someone dying from Covid-19 was 84 which, accounting for the fact that the bulk of non-hospital mortality will have taken place in care homes, sounds plausible. This is also approximately the same as the median age of death for the English population as a whole, according to recent ONS data (broken down as 82.7 years for men and 86.1 years for women.)
If there is going to be a disruption then getting it over and done with while we are already disrupted is entirely logical. If there's going to be issues at the border then doing it while the border is quiet is logical.
What is the purpose of delay? If there's still going to be disruption anyway what purpose does it serve to get through COVID19, get border traffic back up to normal and THEN to have the disruption? It's illogical.
Meanwhile, those actually working from home are quite happy to set their alarm for 8:30, and not pay out a four-figure sum every month on travel, food and drinks. Their employers are happy enough not paying a four-figure sum every month for an expensive office desk and all the infrastructure that goes around it.
Sad and indicative of the challenges people face, yet sensible that they have an actual panic button on the website.
https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1301000306625515520
https://twitter.com/YourWullie/status/1301516015319293953?s=20
A relatively small percentage of the workforce will go back full-time. Many will end up coming in one or two days a week. Many others will wave goodbye to the drudgery altogether. And so the value of office space will decline, and businesses catering to commuters will shrink in scale and number until the survivors match the remaining demand for their services. To attempt to browbeat and cajole people into resuming redundant ways of working and living is to try to reverse time and undo progress. It is a futile endeavour.
I shall be doing some research and getting some money on before I share my conclusions.
The reason is not that I am massively confident in Biden winning the Presidency (he's favourite but only narrowly) but that, in the context of spread betting, the downside risk seems lower because there are more delegate-rich states within Biden's grasp to gain than that he risks losing.
A 5% uniform national swing towards Trump would only deprive Biden of 49 delegates Clinton won (taking him to 183), whereas a 5% swing towards him would give him an extra 161 (taking him to 393).
I'm not saying either of those results is probable, but the latter seems more likely in light of current polls and a President whose divisiveness is unlikely to go away over the next couple of months. And even if they were equally likely, it gives more upside than downside if you buy Biden.
I mean listen to yourself.
We're about to go through an event which will cause a world of pain so let's put ourselves through two events which will cause a world of pain. Do you think we will still only get one set of world of pain?
It's like those investors who forget that just because a stock has gone down by 90% doesn't mean it can't go down by another 90%.
Win by greater than the handicap = 25 points
Win by exactly or less than the handicap = 10 points
Any other result = 0 points
Current prices:
Biden - 20: 11-12.5
Biden -30: 10.5-12
It seems a bit surprising that the prices are so similar, but more research needed.
Too late for me though - I've jumped.
If I were them, at this stage I'd be saying Biden's been part of the Washington swamp long enough to know a few oratorical tricks, but the American public can't be fooled so easily (etc).
What you really mean is you want to cancel it. You don't want it in the first place. But you're not saying that, so you're talking of delay instead.
What advantage does delaying, not cancelling, your so called world of pain serve? How are people best served by going through not just one but two disruptions?
Be honest and say you want Brexit cancelled even though that debate is lost. Delaying is absolutely pointless. It would make the pain dragged out and worse not better.
Writing "first, like" etc makes it even worse!!
Delaying the end of transition serves no purpose whatsoever it just drags out any so called pain and makes it worse. Get on with it and get over with it already.
Anyone even considering tax hikes at this stage in the game needs their tiny head looking at.
As a surefire way to choke off aggregate demand, there is little better.
Madness that it is even being talked about.
Philip, you are a moron.
Soz but sometimes you just have to call it as it is.
I don't want to cancel Brexit. I didn't want it in the first place but you know, democracy and all that, so we have Brexited (don't forget).
What I do think is lunacy of the first order is the absurd fixation on this date or that. Can you remember or do you know the month that we joined? No of course you don't because we were reaching a settlement which was to stand for the next several decades. It's the same thing now. This settlement will set us up for the next generation or five. But no. It has to be done by January. Why not a six or 12-month delay? What on earth is the rush?
The nine-to-five is dead.
The office is certainly not dead.
Blended working will become the new normal, eventually.