Election Betting Odds
Quote: DRichQuote: FinsRuleQuote: FinsRuleOne bet for me. +360 Dems Senate, R House.
Bovada gave me a 50% bonus and 20 slot machine spins to deposit. I then won and cashed out $100 from the slots.
link to original post
That bet is looking very very good right now.
link to original post
Not looking very good this morning. Looks likely to me to be a tie in the Senate.
link to original post
So you’re saying it’s looking very good.
Quote: ams288Quote: DRichQuote: FinsRuleQuote: FinsRuleOne bet for me. +360 Dems Senate, R House.
Bovada gave me a 50% bonus and 20 slot machine spins to deposit. I then won and cashed out $100 from the slots.
link to original post
That bet is looking very very good right now.
link to original post
Not looking very good this morning. Looks likely to me to be a tie in the Senate.
link to original post
A tie in the Senate means Dems control the Senate because Kamala Harris breaks the ties.
link to original post
Yes, but I doubt that wins his bet that the Dems win the senate. It look likely to be 50-50
Quote: billryanDoes anyone know how tall John Fetterman is? One story says he is 6'8 and 290 while one from a few years ago says he is nearly 7 feet and over 400 pounds. He looks big, but not that big.
link to original post
6’8 - 290 seems a lot more accurate to me
Quote: SOOPOOTo me, the three most toxic Repubs in the House are Greene, Boebert, and Gaetz. At least it looks like Boebert will be gone.
I was unaware that Sarah Hucksbee Sanders was running for anything. Apparently she will be the next governor of Arkansas.
link to original post
Good for Sarah Huckabee Sanders! I actually mean that. She seems like a genuinely nice person and very even-keel (despite her being a Baptist); it is also my opinion that she is probably the ONE person that mainstream media actually did blatantly treat unfairly.
Quote: GialmereIt was a good night for democrats who exceeded expectations in all categories.
It was a disappointing night for republicans who watched their red wave both start and end in Florida.
***It was a bad night for pollsters who usually underestimate right-wing support but this time managed to overestimate it.
It was a ho-hum night for viewers who watched the national maps slowly congeal into the same ol' red and blue states take up their same ol' red and blue stances and sing their same ol' red and blue songs.
link to original post
(Asterisks added to above quote)
***Deliberate correction that pollsters overshot, perhaps?
Quote: WizardQuote: ams288The only person Trump was more electable than was Hillary Clinton.
link to original post
May I remind you Hillary won the popular vote in 2016.
link to original post
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? The U.S. is NOT a democracy.That Democrat majority came from the two most populist states, CA & NY.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigymQuote: WizardQuote: ams288The only person Trump was more electable than was Hillary Clinton.
link to original post
May I remind you Hillary won the popular vote in 2016.
link to original post
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? That Democrat majority came from the two most populist states, CA & NY.
tuttigym
link to original post
May I remind you that no first-term Republican has won the popular vote in a Presidential Election since 1988, so essentially, Republicans would seem to rely heavily on NOT needing a plurality of voters to want them as POTUS...otherwise, they might never win again.
Furthermore, even though you were actually living at the time, did you know that there was a time that a simple majority of voters from both of the major parties wanted to go ahead and just abolish the Electoral College?
Quote: ams288I must give kudos to Oz for behaving like a grownup:
link to original post
I'm surprised he had the time for all of that between pricing moving companies. I'm sure some of his stuff is in Pennsylvania and he will want that back in his home of New Jersey eventually.
Quote: Mission146Quote: tuttigymQuote: WizardQuote: ams288The only person Trump was more electable than was Hillary Clinton.
link to original post
May I remind you Hillary won the popular vote in 2016.
link to original post
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? That Democrat majority came from the two most populist states, CA & NY.
tuttigym
link to original post
May I remind you that no first-term Republican has won the popular vote in a Presidential Election since 1988, so essentially, Republicans would seem to rely heavily on NOT needing a plurality of voters to want them as POTUS...otherwise, they might never win again.
Furthermore, even though you were actually living at the time, did you know that there was a time that a simple majority of voters from both of the major parties wanted to go ahead and just abolish the Electoral College?
link to original post
And your point is??? Perhaps you want the majority to ALWAYS RULE. How would that look? One party rule? Get the "numbers" and anything goes? No checks and balances? Your post is a sophomoric rebuttal with no substance.
The Electoral College is still here because it would take a constitutional convention's process to create a new amendment to abolish it. Your post infers that the answer to all our problems is a simple majority vote.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigym
And your point is??? Perhaps you want the majority to ALWAYS RULE. How would that look? One party rule? Get the "numbers" and anything goes? No checks and balances? Your post is a sophomoric rebuttal with no substance.
The Electoral College is still here because it would take a constitutional convention's process to create a new amendment to abolish it. Your post infers that the answer to all our problems is a simple majority vote.
tuttigym
link to original post
It would be a sophomoric rebuttal had I not introduced the argument that Republicans and Democrats alike were once in favor of going to a popular vote. The only reason Republicans changed their position on it is because of the current situation that they might not win the WH otherwise, so your sophomoric counter post that has no substance makes no effort to defend the fact that the Republican Party ONLY wants to preserve the EC because it might not be able to win otherwise because their ideas DO NOT appeal to the majority of citizens.
You could abolish the EC by Amendment, or you could circumvent that necessity by a sufficient number of states (based on representation of EC votes) agreeing to be bound by the nationwide popular vote. That way, they are still sending Electors. That would almost certainly be easier to effectuate than getting an amendment.
Do you want to know why Republicans have trouble winning the popular vote for POTUS? The answer is because some of them seem to want America to be a glorified theocracy, so don't give me any checks and balances crap. Example: Doug Mastriano running for PA Governor and getting positively demoralized last night (how did he get nominated!?) because his main campaign stance was to 100% eliminate abortion with no exceptions whatsoever.
In a state where a simple majority of residents believe abortion should be legal in all instances.
Maybe you don't care whatsoever about popular opinion. Maybe the Republican Party doesn't. That's fine, but this is the result you're going to get.
It's time to start reading the room a little.
ADDED: Your post also argues against a position that I didn't even take by making a false extrapolation, not that I expected your post to do better than that; I assure you, I didn't.
Quote: billryanMastriano was nominated with a lot of democratic support. They knew he would be a dead fish candidate in the general election so they worked to nominate him. I'm not a fan of the tactic, but I learned it when Roger Stone pulled it in 1980.
link to original post
If that's true, then it's only true to an extent as PA has closed primaries.
Quote: SOOPOOI’m watching DeSantis’ GREAT acceptance speech. If Trump didn’t exist, or if he actually cared about America and the Republican Party, DeSantis would wipe the floor with ANY Democrat candidate in 2024.
link to original post
I'm like 90% sure that DeSantis is going to be the next President.
Trump is too toxic at this point, and Dems don't have a solid candidate.
Quote: tuttigym
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? The U.S. is NOT a democracy.
link to original post
We are a republic AND a democracy. Those terms are not mutually exclusive.
Quote: tuttigymQuote: WizardQuote: ams288The only person Trump was more electable than was Hillary Clinton.
link to original post
May I remind you Hillary won the popular vote in 2016.
link to original post
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? The U.S. is NOT a democracy.That Democrat majority came from the two most populist states, CA & NY.
tuttigym
link to original post
So we should throw out the two most populous states and recalculate the popular vote? Okay, let me pick two states to ignore and we’ll re-figure the electoral vote.
Quote: Mission146Also, Democrats must have done a really good job convincing Trump to endorse Mastriano ahead of the primaries. I don't know how they pulled that off.
link to original post
google can be useful at times like these. Democrats paid for the MAGA ads that blitzed tv and outspent all the other republican contenders combined. Democrats did this in three gubernatorial races, and it looks like the strategy worked well for them. Trump endorsing him was the icing on the cake.
Quote: billryanQuote: Mission146Also, Democrats must have done a really good job convincing Trump to endorse Mastriano ahead of the primaries. I don't know how they pulled that off.
link to original post
google can be useful at times like these. Democrats paid for the MAGA ads that blitzed tv and outspent all the other republican contenders combined. Democrats did this in three gubernatorial races, and it looks like the strategy worked well for them. Trump endorsing him was the icing on the cake.
link to original post
Easy there, Bill. I'm not saying that Democratic actions contributed in no way whatsoever to Mastriano winning the Primary. If there's one person on the Forum that I would expect to understand that there are multiple causes for a particular political event...well, it would be SOOPOO...but you're a very close second.
All I am saying is that Democrats did not grab Republicans and hold them at gunpoint to go vote for Mastriano in the Primary. Further, Trump certainly did not endorse Mastriano at the behest of Democrats.
Simply put, in my opinion, it was quite ill-conceived for anyone to vote for Mastriano thinking he'd have any chance in a General Election. For that reason, casting a vote for him was totally illogical in the primaries, unless you wanted Shapiro to win, but again, closed Primary.
There's simply no logical way that should have happened. Mastriano should have got, at best, 10% of the vote if people were voting with an eye towards a Republican candidate who could win the General Election. I guess it's possible that 10% of people, believing they were looking at things critically, might still think Mastriano was a good candidate.
Quote: tuttigymQuote: WizardQuote: ams288The only person Trump was more electable than was Hillary Clinton.
link to original post
May I remind you Hillary won the popular vote in 2016.
link to original post
May I remind you that the U.S. is a representative republic thus the Electoral College? The U.S. is NOT a democracy.That Democrat majority came from the two most populist states, CA & NY.
tuttigym
link to original post
It’s not a recipe for long-term success for a country if the party who keeps getting less votes, keeps winning.
Quote: GialmereIt'll be interesting to see how the Biden camp reads the tea leaves. The president can certainly point to this history defying result to justify running again.
link to original post
Man, I really hope he doesn't run but I have no idea who else it could be.... Kamala is really the only other "logical" choice but I think she would get crushed by whoever the Republican candidate is.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: GialmereIt'll be interesting to see how the Biden camp reads the tea leaves. The president can certainly point to this history defying result to justify running again.
link to original post
Man, I really hope he doesn't run but I have no idea who else it could be.... Kamala is really the only other "logical" choice but I think she would get crushed by whoever the Republican candidate is.
link to original post
(Gavin Newsom)
Quote: Mission146Quote: tuttigym
And your point is??? Perhaps you want the majority to ALWAYS RULE. How would that look? One party rule? Get the "numbers" and anything goes? No checks and balances? Your post is a sophomoric rebuttal with no substance.
The Electoral College is still here because it would take a constitutional convention's process to create a new amendment to abolish it. Your post infers that the answer to all our problems is a simple majority vote.
tuttigym
link to original post
It would be a sophomoric rebuttal had I not introduced the argument that Republicans and Democrats alike were once in favor of going to a popular vote. The only reason Republicans changed their position on it is because of the current situation that they might not win the WH otherwise, so your sophomoric counter post that has no substance makes no effort to defend the fact that the Republican Party ONLY wants to preserve the EC because it might not be able to win otherwise because their ideas DO NOT appeal to the majority of citizens.
You could abolish the EC by Amendment, or you could circumvent that necessity by a sufficient number of states (based on representation of EC votes) agreeing to be bound by the nationwide popular vote. That way, they are still sending Electors. That would almost certainly be easier to effectuate than getting an amendment.
Do you want to know why Republicans have trouble winning the popular vote for POTUS? The answer is because some of them seem to want America to be a glorified theocracy, so don't give me any checks and balances crap. Example: Doug Mastriano running for PA Governor and getting positively demoralized last night (how did he get nominated!?) because his main campaign stance was to 100% eliminate abortion with no exceptions whatsoever.
In a state where a simple majority of residents believe abortion should be legal in all instances.
Maybe you don't care whatsoever about popular opinion. Maybe the Republican Party doesn't. That's fine, but this is the result you're going to get.
It's time to start reading the room a little.
ADDED: Your post also argues against a position that I didn't even take by making a false extrapolation, not that I expected your post to do better than that; I assure you, I didn't.
link to original post
So, introducing some obscure 19th century vote makes your "argument" relevant? Try again, maybe the changes in the number of Supreme Court justices over the years or the attempts to abolish Senate rules or the changes to the Senate rules.
The majority of U.S. citizens are uninformed and pay no attention to politics or current events as demonstrated by the money spent on each side telling lies about the other side. What appeals to the majority are handouts and free stuff. I cannot imagine that any objective individual is okay with our open borders, spending billions or more on taking care of all the illegals, not locally addressing crime, suppressing our energy industries, and what seems to be the degradation of our lifestyle. So tell us all, what "ideas" "appeal" to the majority of citizens? You obviously have great insight into this concept, so enlighten us all.
"A glorified theocrasy"? How many is "some"? And specifically, what "theocrasy" exactly? Maybe atheism is your cup of tea, and that is fine, but would you decree that the whole population join into that concept? Is secularism the mandate? Go for it.
The original point I made to the Wizard was a correction to his post, and you decided to take it to a whole new level and distort the intent to correct. It was sophomoric.
To TigerWu, I posted REPRESENTATIVE republic, and yes parts of our political ways calls for democracy like our local elections.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigym
So, introducing some obscure 19th century vote makes your "argument" relevant? Try again, maybe the changes in the number of Supreme Court justices over the years or the attempts to abolish Senate rules or the changes to the Senate rules.
"Obscure 19th Century vote?" What are you even talking about? I told you that I am referring to a poll that took place while you were alive!.
If you're going to seemingly refuse to use context clues before responding to me, I will link you to this:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/159881/americans-call-term-limits-end-electoral-college.aspx
Which is even better for my position, because that was in 2013, which I hadn't realized. I was actually referring to a poll I remember seeing on a Gallup historical trends chart that was from the 70's, or something. Here's an article about that:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/2140/americans-support-proposal-eliminate-electoral-college-system.aspx
I can't seem to find the actual full results of that poll, though. Sorry about that.
Quote:The majority of U.S. citizens are uninformed and pay no attention to politics or current events as demonstrated by the money spent on each side telling lies about the other side. What appeals to the majority are handouts and free stuff. I cannot imagine that any objective individual is okay with our open borders, spending billions or more on taking care of all the illegals, not locally addressing crime, suppressing our energy industries, and what seems to be the degradation of our lifestyle. So tell us all, what "ideas" "appeal" to the majority of citizens? You obviously have great insight into this concept, so enlighten us all.
I don't have any insight as to what ideas would appeal to a simple majority of U.S. citizens. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I never claimed to have any such insight. I simply stated that, at one time, both parties were in favor of getting rid of the Electoral College. This is something that people like me refer to as a, "Fact." Whether or not you choose to accept that fact is up to you (links above) and makes no difference to me.
That said, here are the ideas that polling would suggest have majority approval that Republicans seem to be (at least sometimes) against:
Gay marriage remaining legal: ~70%
Some level of abortion access being legal: 50%+
My personal views are irrelevant, but I will offer that I favor the legality of gay marriage and am personally pro-choice, though I happen to agree with our current SCOTUS that the latter is a state-level issue pursuant to the Tenth Amendment.
Quote:"A glorified theocrasy"? How many is "some"? And specifically, what "theocrasy" exactly? Maybe atheism is your cup of tea, and that is fine, but would you decree that the whole population join into that concept? Is secularism the mandate? Go for it.
Feel free to look up the word, "Theocracy," at your leisure and get back to me. Also, I am not an Atheist; how could I know that there is absolutely not a god?
Quote:The original point I made to the Wizard was a correction to his post, and you decided to take it to a whole new level and distort the intent to correct. It was sophomoric.
To TigerWu, I posted REPRESENTATIVE republic, and yes parts of our political ways calls for democracy like our local elections.
tuttigym
link to original post
I don't know why you think you have the authority to correct Wizard as to any matter, but you don't.
Further, Wizard's entire statement was Hillary Clinton beat Trump in the 2016 Popular Vote, which is true, so you didn't correct anything. Your implication may have been that winning the EC, by definition, proves that Trump is more electable, but that is simply an opinion which absolutely does nothing to prove Wizard's statement incorrect.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: GialmereIt'll be interesting to see how the Biden camp reads the tea leaves. The president can certainly point to this history defying result to justify running again.
link to original post
Man, I really hope he doesn't run but I have no idea who else it could be.... Kamala is really the only other "logical" choice but I think she would get crushed by whoever the Republican candidate is.
link to original post
Can someone get ahold of Paul Ryan? I wouldn't mind seeing a debate rematch---this time for the big office.
And...I probably wouldn't mind at all if Ryan won. Fair chance I'd vote for him.
Quote: Mission146
And...I probably wouldn't mind at all if Ryan won. Fair chance I'd vote for him.
link to original post
I really don't know any of his issues, but he sure comes across as a likeable guy and seems to act presidential.
I think it is an affront to one person, one vote. There is no reason why we can't have a modern nationwide election.
Let's ignore the two major parties for a second and look at the following objective fact:
---In a significant majority of Presidential Elections in this country's history, the winner has won at least a plurality of the popular vote.
This is a true statement. I do understand (without pointing to anyone in particular) that objective facts can be a problem for people sometimes, but I assure everyone that this statement is true.
That being the case, we extrapolate that a popular/plurality vote winner will generally also win the Electoral College.
Okay, so in terms of electability, again ignoring party, if I asked:
Which of the following two candidates would you choose:
A.) A candidate who will definitely win a plurality, if not majority, of the popular vote.
OR:
B.) A candidate who will definitely lose the plurality popular vote, and possibly have the majority of voters vote for the opposition...but could theoretically win via the Electoral College and ONLY the Electoral College.
If I asked you which candidate is more electable?
For me, give me the one who is going to win the popular vote as, historically, they also tend to win the Electoral College regardless of the party they represent.
Quote: billryanIn 2000, the Republicans thought there was a good chance they would win the popular vote but lose the electoral one and were prepared to go to court over it. Democrats were prepared to argue for it, but then The Rs won the electoral but lost the popular and the shoe was on the other foot.
I think it is an affront to one person, one vote. There is no reason why we can't have a modern nationwide election.
link to original post
I can think of two reasonably obvious ones.
First, the small states realize they have far more say with the Electoral College than a nationwide popular vote, and as long as 13 states refuse to change, we're stuck with it, since it takes 38 to amend the Constitution. At least you can get rid of the Electoral College; the one thing you cannot change is the right of every state to have as many Senators as every other state.
Second, there is no provision for federal oversight of vote counting. Because of this, I can see some states passing the following law:
"Prior to January 21 of the year following a Presidential election, the only 'official' results of a Presidential or Vice Presidential election within this state that can be released are (a) the total number of votes cast, and (b) the name of the person who received a plurality of the votes."
They don't do that now because there is no need to do that now.
Down only 20k with lots of Clark County mail votes left to tally…
Quote: ams288Am I crazy, or is Cortez Masto going to pull out a win in the NV senate race?
Down only 20k with lots of Clark County mail votes left to tally…
link to original post
There will definitely be calls for a recount whichever way it turns out.
Quote: DRichQuote: ams288Am I crazy, or is Cortez Masto going to pull out a win in the NV senate race?
Down only 20k with lots of Clark County mail votes left to tally…
link to original post
There will definitely be calls for a recount whichever way it turns out.
link to original post
Before the election, Jon Ralston predicted Sisolak would lose and CCM would barely hang on. Looks like he may have been right.
Quote: ams288Am I crazy, or is Cortez Masto going to pull out a win in the NV senate race?
Down only 20k with lots of Clark County mail votes left to tally…
link to original post
I worked on the campaign to get her elected. I'm not sure I would have voted to re-elect her, except she was running against an even emptier suit. She had done nothing in Washington and has no one but herself to blame if she loses.
Quote: ams288A nail biter!
link to original post
I'm surprised it's even THAT close. I've heard a lot of Republicans in her district hate her because she's obsessed with fame, is never there, and hasn't done anything for them.
Quote: ams288
I don't think the betting markets 'lost' by giving Dems a 30% chance of winning. If outcomes that are priced to occur 30% of the time ended up occurring 0% of the time, then there would be something systematically wrong (and therefore exploitable) with the pricing mechanism. I would be interested to know the historical EV of betting on favorites vs. underdogs and whether there is any systematic underpricing or overpricing of Republicans or Democrats. I doubt there is.
What a mess.
Quote: billryanWhat kind of action is there on the next Speaker of the House? I'm not sure it is going to be who everyone expected it would be. There is no way he gets 218 votes without selling out his principles.
link to original post
LOL You think that's ever stopped a politician before?
Quote: TigerWuQuote: billryanWhat kind of action is there on the next Speaker of the House? I'm not sure it is going to be who everyone expected it would be. There is no way he gets 218 votes without selling out his principles.
link to original post
LOL You think that's ever stopped a politician before?
link to original post
I'm not sure he has any left to bargain with. There will be about 30-40 members who won't vote for him unless he proceeds with impeachment and the same who won't vote for him if he proceeds with it. Either way, he is well short of 218 votes.
Quote: ams288Am I crazy, or is Cortez Masto going to pull out a win in the NV senate race?
Down only 20k with lots of Clark County mail votes left to tally…
link to original post
Cortez Masto has been huge favorite on Predictit since yesterday. It would be big surprise for her not to win. Same with the Dem in Arizona. Seems likely the Walker/Warnock runoff will just be important to Joe Manchin….!
I don't know why people are buying Scalise for 11 cents when he has endorsed McCarthy.
