US Presidential Election 2020

[STT]

The speculative money shorter term participants might be left but the longer term back bone, the old timers I would characterise as right wing or conservative at least financially.   I'd just put it as people who think national debt can rise forever and its wealth creation so why not more and another group who expect failure and destructive debt failure at some point, for the moment that'd be considered to the right.   The old hands in BTC wont sell because they know the dollar cannot reverse failures its suffered, inversely its best to hold BTC but thats a stern stance vs most speculators that pop in here.   Same would be true for YEN or EURO or lots of other fiscal considerations, its not politics and it is because the maths behind whats been done is so bad.
  

trump in many ways is not a conservative

Trump is left wing but he appeals to conservative voters in rhetoric who've given up honest representation from the alternatives.   I dont think Trump is a politician, he is still playing TV host of a game just its a bit bigger now.   If you didnt know Trump was a member of the democrat party prior to switching to this side.  I realise he appears right but my main take is always the tax revenue and expenditure, you can only have views you pay for and in that regard he is left wing weak or easy money over spender.    Somebody has to clear up that mess in future but its very hard to say as far left and far right policies often resemble each other and the political horse shoe almost meets in the middle.
   My simple take is the whole spectrum now is rebased to the left, we've gone with easy money for decades so who would not take the easier path given by that on various policies, so every party is to the left in their outlook until it falls apart.

[1714775716]

1714775716

[1714775716]

1714775716

[1714775716]

1714775716

[1714775716]

1714775716

[1714775716]

1714775716

[1714775716]

1714775716

[bbc.reporter]

@figmentofmyass, @STT. Trump is a populist with an inclination towards authoritarianism to run his policies. I reckon Bernie is similar to Trump, however more reasonable.

In any case, the polls, the odds has suddenly made it become 2016 again where the Democrats were so certain that Hillary would win.

[figmentofmyass]

In any case, the polls, the odds has suddenly made it become 2016 again where the Democrats were so certain that Hillary would win.

not exactly---otherwise i'd be betting. most polls were hovering around 80% in favor of clinton on election day IIRC, with betting odds around 75%. we've still got a ways to go from there. betfair is still pricing biden at 57% to win.

[notblox1]

Odds on this website are just wrong, but I will take them gladly.
https://odds.watch/trump-2020

Better to check this presidental election race animation as this is popular now in bitcointalk forum
https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2881414/?utm_source=showcase&utm_campaign=visualisation/2881414

[Vishnu.Reang]

@figmentofmyass, @STT. Trump is a populist with an inclination towards authoritarianism to run his policies. I reckon Bernie is similar to Trump, however more reasonable.

In any case, the polls, the odds has suddenly made it become 2016 again where the Democrats were so certain that Hillary would win.

Many of the right-wingers are now including populist financial policies, in order to broaden their support base. Proper Republicans are fiscally conservative, and they would try their best to limit "wasteful" spending, such as welfare payments. But Trump has gone to the opposite direction, by adopting more and more fiscally liberal policies. He is mixing his right-wing policies on immigration and crime, with left-wing policies on welfare and trade.

[bbc.reporter]

In any case, the polls, the odds has suddenly made it become 2016 again where the Democrats were so certain that Hillary would win.

not exactly---otherwise i'd be betting. most polls were hovering around 80% in favor of clinton on election day IIRC, with betting odds around 75%. we've still got a ways to go from there. betfair is still pricing biden at 57% to win.

Trump is on a better position today than what the sportsbooks offered on this month on 2016 hehehe. The sportsbooks might have learned from their mistake, however, I speculate the Democrats might be overconfident based on some of the news articles I have read.

Source https://www.oddsshark.com/entertainment/us-presidential-odds-2016-futures

[figmentofmyass]

not exactly---otherwise i'd be betting. most polls were hovering around 80% in favor of clinton on election day IIRC, with betting odds around 75%. we've still got a ways to go from there. betfair is still pricing biden at 57% to win.

Trump is on a better position today than what the sportsbooks offered on this month on 2016 hehehe. The sportsbooks might have learned from their mistake, however, I speculate the Democrats might be overconfident based on some of the news articles I have read.

the books don't price odds based on what they expect the outcome to be. they price them based on what punters are betting, so they make a small but reliable profit no matter the outcome.

it's the punters (and the pollsters) who seem to have learned from 2016. they aren't betting on a landslide---not yet at least.

trump down to 35%......below 30%, i start betting on him. https://odds.watch/trump-2020

[johhnyUA]

trump down to 35%......below 30%, i start betting on him. https://odds.watch/trump-2020

Why so, what a logic to do that? As i remember, it was you who told me that Trump has few chances to win.

Does it mean, that you already bet on Biden and now trying to do some kind of "golden middle"? (i don't know a correct term in english, in postUSSR we have our term for that - "betting fork" ), when it doesnt matter which one will win, you will get your profit anyway?

[figmentofmyass]

trump down to 35%......below 30%, i start betting on him. https://odds.watch/trump-2020

Why so, what a logic to do that? As i remember, it was you who told me that Trump has few chances to win.

Does it mean, that you already bet on Biden and now trying to do some kind of "golden middle"? (i don't know a correct term in english, in postUSSR we have our term for that - "betting fork" ), when it doesnt matter which one will win, you will get your profit anyway?

yes, that's the basic idea. this is what i had said:

most presidents don't get reelected with approval ratings this low---not that i would write off trump yet, but i don't see "great" chances for winning here. i see a very hotly contested election. a coin flip, which is why i am not interested in betting on either biden or trump unless either gets priced above 3 to win.

i want to bet on trump when the odds are deeply against him, then also bet on biden in the next couple months assuming trump's numbers recover. effectively i would be betting against the punters who took low money odds on either candidate, and not so much betting on the outcome itself.

i still don't have a strong opinion about the outcome---so many unknowns and unpredictable factors this far out. this seems like the only logical way to approach it.

[STT]

Im not sure even Trumps most loyal supporters are going to get behind a gigantic screwup if the spread of this virus gets out of hand and makes USA the worst example of management world wide.   Maybes theres worse and just the stats dont reflect it but theres no way to cover it up in usa in an election year when so many want him out.

The problem is this current data isnt the problem, the fallout is Autumn and Winter where apparently the effects of any flu type propagation get worse and then time that together with a November election and most people will vote on that day not prior.   Maybe they can still fix it or in some luck its not as bad in spreading as feared but I doubt a vaccine can arrive to help before November, its really about December at best and mostly 2021.    I wouldnt be surprised if most healthy people with no special need dont get anything maybe till 2 or even 3 years in.  Unless its judged cheaper to do everyone collectively and then you have the problem of some resisting the idea, some cant handle wearing a mask for 5 minutes in a shop which is no big request seriously.

[DarkDays]

Joe Biden is a solid guy. He's always seen as the Obama sidekick, I remember seeing them youtube videos about their quirkiness.

It would certainly elevate USA in my eyes once agains as a land where people are welcome with a warm smile rather than a racist snarl.

i want to bet on trump when the odds are deeply against him,

Does it matter if the odds are against him? I think he already said he does not want to be involved in politics anymore. Correct me if I say wrong... might have seen some fake news on the situation.

[Onuohakk]

Joe Biden is a solid guy. He's always seen as the Obama sidekick, I remember seeing them youtube videos about their quirkiness.

It would certainly elevate USA in my eyes once agains as a land where people are welcome with a warm smile rather than a racist snarl.

i want to bet on trump when the odds are deeply against him,

Does it matter if the odds are against him? I think he already said he does not want to be involved in politics anymore. Correct me if I say wrong... might have seen some fake news on the situation.

Obama is fully in support of Joe Biden, he has raised about $16million for Joe Biden elections. The presidential election this year, will not be easy for Trump.

I do wish America government will launch blockchain based online voting and election system cos South Korea reveals to launch theirs beforehand
https://cryptocrunchapp.com/news/south-korea-reveals-to-launch-blockchain-based-online-voting-and-election-system

[johhnyUA]

yes, that's the basic idea. this is what i had said:

At least do not try to bet on both them in one book, because i don't know how in your country, but in our (and i think this is in every another country) books banning account if they find that you're doing forks. 

And yeah, interesting idea, But i think the better chances to bet on Biden gone long time ago. ( i mean that his raiting will not fall, so odds for him will be lower and lower)

[deisik]

yes, that's the basic idea. this is what i had said:

At least do not try to bet on both them in one book, because i don't know how in your country, but in our (and i think this is in every another country) books banning account if they find that you're doing forks

I'm not into this kind of thing

So there might be a very specific term in the bookmaking parlance but since you asked and as far as I know, what you are looking for is called arbitrage, i.e. taking offsetting positions to generate a riskless profit. With that said and hopefully being right, I'm not sure if you can technically pull it off with the same bookie (though I'm still interested to find out if you actually can, so bear with me)

[virasog]

Anything can happen in these USA Elections 

[coinfinger]

Look Biden is working really hard towards Texas and if he could get it, that means it is all over. Last elections there was just 3 states where 70k people could have voted for Hillary and the whole election would have changed, we are talking about 150 million people voting and 70k people switching sides changes everything. This time around Biden will try to get all those states and honestly Trump looks like he may lose those states instead because he has been going horrible since this pandemic started.

However if Biden gets Texas it is all over, it would not be just a loss but it would be a record breaking difference as well, not only Biden will reach to 270 but he would probably go over 320 in that case. I hope that it happens, Texas has been red for way too long and getting Texas would change so much for democrats.

[johhnyUA]

I'm not into this kind of thing

So there might be a very specific term in the bookmaking parlance but since you asked and as far as I know, what you are looking for is called arbitrage, i.e. taking offsetting positions to generate a riskless profit. With that said and hopefully being right, I'm not sure if you can technically pull it off with the same bookie (though I'm still interested to find out if you actually can, so bear with me)

Paying attention to that fact that you're from Eastern Europe too (as i am) i think you understand pretty well what does it mean term "fork" in booking. And yeah, books banning for such things if they find that someone doing that. Of course, from one account you can't do fork, because you will be wiped away immediately. Another account and so on used for such things.

[deisik]

I'm not into this kind of thing

So there might be a very specific term in the bookmaking parlance but since you asked and as far as I know, what you are looking for is called arbitrage, i.e. taking offsetting positions to generate a riskless profit. With that said and hopefully being right, I'm not sure if you can technically pull it off with the same bookie (though I'm still interested to find out if you actually can, so bear with me)

Paying attention to that fact that you're from Eastern Europe too (as i am) i think you understand pretty well what does it mean term "fork" in booking. And yeah, books banning for such things if they find that someone doing that. Of course, from one account you can't do fork, because you will be wiped away immediately. Another account and so on used for such things

Well, I didn't mean it that way

Indeed, you can use multiple accounts for this, but of what advantage will they be to you? The arbitrage opportunity can be purposefully and profitably exploited between two different bookies, no doubt about that. But the question is whether arbitrage is possible within the same bookmaker (which I doubt)? As I understand it, the odds are adjusted in such a way that the bookie is always earning something, no matter who actually wins. This, more or less, leaves no room for and essentially rules out internal arbitrage, or fork as you call it (read, they are not fools)

[tyKiwanuka]

But the question is whether arbitrage is possible within the same bookmaker (which I doubt)? As I understand it, the odds are adjusted in such a way that the bookie is always earning something, no matter who actually wins. This, more or less, leaves no room for and essentially rules out internal arbitrage, or fork as you call it (read, they are not fools)

Of course this is possible even within the same bookmaker Pre-match it's a bit harder to achieve, because the markets move slow, but in-play you can do it all the time.

Look at these odds:


Source: https://www.betonline.ag/sportsbook/politics/electoral-college

In this post, you can read that "The Field" had 2.04 in the past:

It's also ~4% surebet with betonline.ag (2.16 Trump at Betfair, 2.04 "The Field" at betonline), if anyone is interested.

Now you put 53% of your stake on the 2.04 and 47% of your stake on the 2.30 and you have 8.11% surebet (trading/arbitrage profit). You can also get unlucky of course and the odds don't move in your favour - thats the risky part about trading/arbitrage Bookmakers don't like it of course, but they kick out winning players anyway, no matter if you do arbitrage or not. Doing arbitrage at traditional bookmakers is a bit meh though, since you pay the house edge for every bet. Exchanges like Betfair are better suited, because you just pay a commission on your net profit.


Another example would be a football match; inplay. You bet on team A to win for odds of 2.00. The next second they score the lead. You can now play X2 for 3.00 et voila, you have a sure profit, no matter what is FT result. Bookmakers even urge you to take sure profit with offering a "cashout option" more and more (it's value/valuable for them, if you use it, thats why they offer it).

[STT]

So in those terms you are saying it might be most profitable to lay the bet for Trump winning and take the profits if he does not, rather then attempt to bet for Biden exactly.     Does everyone have access to that possibility, I think I've done this a long time ago with some instructions on a forum but I would have to speak to someone I know.