But when you look at the other hopefuls I suppose that's the best the US has to offer. Someone with a bit of charisma and talent could still burst through the ruck to capture the limelight, but it looks unlikely.
The Next USA President
- Thread starter Humpy
- Start date
But when you look at the other hopefuls I suppose that's the best the US has to offer. Someone with a bit of charisma and talent could still burst through the ruck to capture the limelight, but it looks unlikely.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Thanks for the info; just where is that data from-Arkansas dog bet track[Southland Greyhound Park Arkansas?? LOL] The low number for Jeb '' common core'' Bush maybe correct As a life time resident of USA, for over 58 years, lots of data on your chart seems inaccurate, or questionable at best, unless that is a chart for liars +rinos at the top
But thanks for your input since that chart is not in alphaBET order; putting Mr Jeb''common corrupt core'' Bush 2nd is a laugh also. The lottery is a stupid tax on people that can NOT do math ;thanks for your input, MR Hum......
I'm curious when those odds came out. If I'm reading it correctly, most of the bookies have Jeb! and Biden as up to twice as likely to win as Trump. Biden is not even a declared candidate, so it is hard to reconcile his odds with Hillary's. IOW both can't be the nominee, so if Hillary has such short odds of being president, Biden's odds should be very long, longer than Trump who is leading the republican field by a large margin. Jeb is so unpopular with the republican base, his odds of winning seem very long indeed to me even if he gets the nomination.
Most likely what is at work here is these lines were set to reflect the amount of action on each candidate. The UK bettors are largely exposed to far left UK news sources and naturally believe Hillary, Bush and Biden have the inside track.
Most likely what is at work here is these lines were set to reflect the amount of action on each candidate. The UK bettors are largely exposed to far left UK news sources and naturally believe Hillary, Bush and Biden have the inside track.
Fair point about faraway betting across the pond. Please someone put up the US betting then. It should be on the net somewhere.
Because the betting in the actual country is so split locally the picture might be a bit different. And where there is difference, there is money to be made.
I expect there might be a big swing on the girlie side for Carly Fiorina ? I just spotted that Chelsea Clinton is also running !! She comes in at 300/1 !
Because the betting in the actual country is so split locally the picture might be a bit different. And where there is difference, there is money to be made.
I expect there might be a big swing on the girlie side for Carly Fiorina ? I just spotted that Chelsea Clinton is also running !! She comes in at 300/1 !
Last edited:
predictit.org, but i haven't been able to find where they are located. It's a real money trading on politics site.
https://www.predictit.org/Market/1234/Who-will-win-the-2016-US-presidential-election
https://www.predictit.org/Market/1234/Who-will-win-the-2016-US-presidential-election
Those odds seem reasonable, but only due to the fact that the Republican field is tremendously fractured whereas the Democratic field is consolidated into Hillary (no offense intended Bill) and it is not even primary season yet. The Republicans need to put someone forward who can win,
which means getting swing voters. IMO, this rules out the mavericks, oddballs, and whackjobs like Trump, Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, and Fiorina. I'd rather have Pataki than any of the aforementioned. The two vanilla guys, Bush and Kasich I think have the best chance of defeating Clinton. However, Bush has to work on his body language to project greater confidence and certainty. He often shakes his head when he is making a point, which signals he is at odds with his own statement. And instead of nodding his head, he kind of does a quick little snap which suggests tension. Jimmy Carter in his debate against Reagan often raised his eyebrows in a tense way and voters found it viscerally off-putting. Kasich's best advantage at this point is he has no clear handicaps
and negative associations high in the public mind.
which means getting swing voters. IMO, this rules out the mavericks, oddballs, and whackjobs like Trump, Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, and Fiorina. I'd rather have Pataki than any of the aforementioned. The two vanilla guys, Bush and Kasich I think have the best chance of defeating Clinton. However, Bush has to work on his body language to project greater confidence and certainty. He often shakes his head when he is making a point, which signals he is at odds with his own statement. And instead of nodding his head, he kind of does a quick little snap which suggests tension. Jimmy Carter in his debate against Reagan often raised his eyebrows in a tense way and voters found it viscerally off-putting. Kasich's best advantage at this point is he has no clear handicaps
and negative associations high in the public mind.
We ran a guy last time who was far more impressive than Bush or Kasich and he got crushed. He couldn't get the party base of older white voters to turn out in sufficient numbers to defeat the democrat vote fraud machine. These guys will do even worse.
I realize that many republican establishment figures would rather lose gracefully than win if winning requires bare knuckle fighting. I also realize the last thing they want is a true conservative or a popular outsider to win, because that could well interfere with corporate logrolling.
I realize that many republican establishment figures would rather lose gracefully than win if winning requires bare knuckle fighting. I also realize the last thing they want is a true conservative or a popular outsider to win, because that could well interfere with corporate logrolling.
