US Presidential election 2016

Having some sweet trades tonight, mainly on Sanders; I have to wonder if I am playing against "Bots" that aren't watching tv !
Latest one -- requested a back on Bernie at 20, soon filled; layed back at 3.5 three minutes later. :)
 
Past the halfway mark

Cruz = 28.7%
Trump = 25.2%
Rubio = 21.2%

on 55%

Mind you, with 64% of the Republican's identifying themselves as either born again or evangelical christians, an undeclared aethist was always up against it. I'm given to understand that a lot of Santorum districts are yet to declare, so you have to think they'll only add to Cruz.

Can Rubio mug Trump?

I think it's over for Iowa at this stage

Cruz wins
 
SlimChance said:
The 2016 US Presidential Election has a chance to be one of the more interesting cycles of my lifetime from various unique fronts, but in particular the betting markets, who are dealing with significant amounts of uncertainty, largely because traditional polling models do not bring the trust they once did.

This uncertainty has led to some wild fluctuations, and the first test out of the gate, the Iowa Caucus, is quite an example. Less than two weeks ago Ted Cruz was trading as high as 1/3 off of some major media stories, now he can be found for as high as 7/4. Can you imagine that kind of swing ever taking place in the Sports Betting marketplace? This is going to leave some opportunities out there, and I believe there is one we can put into the pocket for small now – Ted Cruz at 6/4 or better to win Iowa. In what may turn out to be a coin flip, I believe this is more than fair value.

Why have the odds shifted in Donald Trump’s favor in the state? Largely because of his showing in the national polls, and also when those national pollsters have isolated Iowa, which has made headlines. But what happens when the polling comes from inside the state? Try this (http://www.news.iastate.edu/news/2016/01/26/caucuspoll). Or if the polling is from a source that does not need to generate ratings, like here (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-...rsity-poll/iowa/release-detail?ReleaseID=2318). But those polls won’t make headlines, though they may be closer to the reality, something not reflected in the current pricing.

I also believe this commentary from pundit Steve Deace may be on point. (http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-caucus-math-for-grown-ups/) Deace certainly has his biases, so like many members of the Mediaverse his views get taken with a grain of salt, but he also happens to be on the scene in Iowa, and there is substance to the way he breaks down the particulars. An earlier column by Deace also brought some logical food for thought – http://stevedeace.com/news/pollsters-and-their-fools-paradise/

“So now we have FOX as well as CNN producing polls this week that show 300,000 Iowans are voting in the Iowa Caucuses, and therefore Trump with a double-digit lead. Allow me to put those projected turnout numbers in perspective:

–That’s about a 200% voter increase from the highest Iowa Caucus turnout ever back in 2008.

–The most voters we’ve had in a primary (which always has higher turnout) in Iowa this century is only 230,000. And our last U.S. Senate primary had only roughly 150,000 voters in 2014.

–There are actually 11,000 fewer registered Republicans in Iowa this January than in January 2015.

Given those facts, I simply do not believe the projected turnout models in these polls. I have no idea why these polls have suddenly produced these massive turnout models in their weighting in the last week. Perhaps it’s as simple as Trump has consistently polled lower in Iowa than everywhere else, and they’re concerned with getting caught with their pants down come caucus night. I don’t know. But there is absolutely zero evidence on the ground you’re going to see a turnout that massive.”

That was written before yet another plot twist took place, Trump announcing (http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/26/media/donald-trump-poll-debate-fox/) that he will not participate in Thursday’s debate on Fox, coming from Des Moines. This has a chance to make his backers in the state just a touch skittish, and based upon the closeness of the polls that I trust the most, and the fact that in their breakdowns they were showing much of Trump’s support coming from folks that have not taken part in the Caucus process in the past, it makes Cruz a value in this price range.
Click to expand...

Some lads write essays, others knock winners out of the park.
 
SlimChance said:
Some lads write essays, others knock winners out of the park.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Nah, some lads post cut 'n paste jobs without acknowledging the original writer, and try to pass off same as their own work.
Stop already with the bs, mate, some of us ain't fooled.
 
My interpretation would be that Trump roused the impressionable rabble but, as is the norm, the rabble had second thoughts and saw sense when picking up the polling booth pencil

It would appear that both Cruz and Rubio outperformed the pollsters predictions which suggests that erstwhile, noisy Trumpers switched in similar numbers to both

Cruz would seem somewhat less repellant than Trump so let's break out the booze!

Given that Mrs Clinton is on record as saying "they don't like me in Iowa" her neck-and-neck with Sanders bodes is a very good result, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter who the President is - this thread is pointless apart from the betting bit, which I expect is most of it.
 
Drone said:
My interpretation would be that Trump roused the impressionable rabble but, as is the norm, the rabble had second thoughts and saw sense when picking up the polling booth pencil

It would appear that both Cruz and Rubio outperformed the pollsters predictions which suggests that erstwhile, noisy Trumpers switched in similar numbers to both

Cruz would seem somewhat less repellant than Trump so let's break out the booze!

Given that Mrs Clinton is on record as saying "they don't like me in Iowa" her neck-and-neck with Sanders bodes is a very good result, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Of course they did. Wasn't that pretty much on the cards? Loads of hot air but at the end of the day on here. but a vote is a vote. Cruz isn't a nice bloke though and unlike trump has no sense of self parody.

as an aside on trump. Watch his clip with Ali g. It's fantastic. Trump wasn't taken in at all and laughed his way through it very nicely

im sure plenty were hoping desperately that trump would win to demonstrate their prejudice about how stupid Americans are

as if we have a sane and smart opposition leader here...

Clinton will stuff the senile commie
 
icebreaker said:
:lol:

Nah, some lads post cut 'n paste jobs without acknowledging the original writer, and try to pass off same as their own work.
Stop already with the bs, mate, some of us ain't fooled.
Click to expand...

Who's fooling anyone. I don't write essays.
 
Colin Phillips said:
I was going to mention 'copy and paste' as well.

Showing my ignorance of American politics - does this mean that Trump definitely won't be the next POTUS?
Click to expand...

Whats wrong with cut and pasting. Half the posts on here are ideas stolen from elsewhere. The next time an original thought is put on this forum it will be a first.
 
Drone said:
My interpretation would be that Trump roused the impressionable rabble but, as is the norm, the rabble had second thoughts and saw sense when picking up the polling booth pencil

It would appear that both Cruz and Rubio outperformed the pollsters predictions which suggests that erstwhile, noisy Trumpers switched in similar numbers to both

Cruz would seem somewhat less repellant than Trump so let's break out the booze!

Given that Mrs Clinton is on record as saying "they don't like me in Iowa" her neck-and-neck with Sanders bodes is a very good result, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes but Rubio getting the Republican nomination is worst case scenario for her. He can actually win.
 
SlimChance said:
Whats wrong with cut and pasting. Half the posts on here are ideas stolen from elsewhere. The next time an original thought is put on this forum it will be a first.
Click to expand...

Ive glanced at the thread and it's been unreadable. And will remain so

its not an orginal thought but elections and polls are for many like chasing a glamorous flakey bird. Yes you think this is the one for me and you try to convince yourself that you could spend 24/7 with a self obsessed nut because she fluttered eyelids and had tits from heaven

but push comes to shove...

heart of of heart you know it will be a fcking nightmare with plates thrown on a daily basis
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
Ive glanced at the thread and it's been unreadable. And will remain so
Click to expand...

But I'm a villain of the clueless for providing actionable information. I've met the author of my "cut and paste crimes" in Las Vegas last Summer. That's proper betting networking. I'm an expert on nothing, I just source good information for betting purposes, not to look intellectual on a forum.
 
Colin Phillips said:
Showing my ignorance of American politics - does this mean that Trump definitely won't be the next POTUS?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say "definitely", Iowa is a particularly unrepresentative state, and was never natural Trump territory. His camp will probably argue he's done quite well, and at one level he has, but expectations had run away with him, so at another level he hasn't. He's also had his own self-pedalled myth of being an invincible winner punctured

Conventional wisdom up until now had been that the moderates (I use the term loosely) were the divided wing, and what you might call the 'sensible' vote was being split. If you look at the figures from Iowa though, the extremists still hold sway

Cruz 28%
Trump 24%
Rubio 23%
Carson 9%

That's 61% there

We might expect the likes of Huckerbee, Santorum, and Fiorina, to exit after New Hampshire. Kasich and Christie have gone all in there and could conceivably follow them before South Carolina. Logic says that a majority of their support will gravitate towards Rubio, possibly with the crippled Jeb Bush picking up some scraps. The Godist supporters of Santorum and Hukerbee however will probably go to Cruz.

By now Rubio could well be polling top of the tree. A lot is going to depend on how the support of the other right wing candidates identify themselves

Carson is another Godist, if this is his primary appeal his supporters might well head Cruz's way too

Trump will probably be able to pick up some flag waving patirots, but won't be doing so in the same numbers as the others make their deal with the Lord

What we don't know is how many of the right wing extremists identify themselves through patriotism and philosophy? Once God has exhausted his endorsements, that's what should be left, and this probably fits the Trump narrative better than the others

All this assumes though that Cruz and Carson get knocked out. Both have cash, and won't be under immediate pressure to fold. The longer they stay in suits Rubio as the dynamics of the split vote transfers. It now becomes a right wing problem with little prospect of an accommodation between the protagonists. It would also be a mistake of course to assume that right wing voters will look for another right wing harbour to pitch up in. Some will be happy to go the Rubio route, who in another era (say the 1980's) would be considered extreme himself such has been the shift in the epicentre

I'm sure they'll be pouring over where Trump failed and you have to suspect it was down to boots on the ground and the nature of a caucus

He had a 5pt lead on the Selzer poll, and apparently held a similar lead on the CNN entry poll. By the time they came out though he was 4pts behind. Basically he'd suffered a 4.5% swing against inside the meetings. One suspects that various church influences were brought to bear as various community leaders (pastors) contributed vociferiously in favour of a vote for God (its medieval in places)

Most states vote in primaries rather than a caucus, this probably suits Trump better

Had he won Iowa then I think that we had to consider he could win just about anywhere. He hasn't, but his vote wasn't necessarily soft protestors either. Most of it turned out. I just think the undecideds and flakeys broke for God, in much the same way they did with Santorum and Huckerbee previously, and Pat Robertson of course who shcoked George H Bush, before normality was restored in New Hampshire

You would probably conclude that Rubio is the winner for now. If you were a GOP strategist you can't really see how someone like Cruz is going to win you Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Hampshire, Minnesota, or Virginia. In many respects Trump is preferable to Cruz
 
Last edited:
Colin Phillips said:
Slim, nothing wrong with "copy and paste' at all but it is nice to acknowledge the source.

PS I'm very impressed by your contacts!
Click to expand...

Anyone who followed the basketball thread from last year knows where to find Mr Malisnky's work. I've cut and past a load of his stuff and some members on here are regular readers of his daily column. The site he works for is an atrocious den of iniquity and I refuse to promote it. He gets paid well to hold his nose working for them. Accusing me of using his material as my own is laughable, everyone knows I can't write a post of more than 5 lines without feeling suicidal. If anyone can''t get the humor from my "some lads write essays, I knock winners out of the park" then God help us all.
 
clivex said:
im sure plenty were hoping desperately that trump would win to demonstrate their prejudice about how stupid Americans are
Click to expand...

I think you could argue that Cruz is an even bigger indictment. Indeed, this seemed to be the view being expressed by the GOP hierarchy

It could all look very different again in a couple of weeks
 
Warbler said:
Most states vote in primaries rather than a caucus, this probably suits Trump better
Click to expand...

That is why the polls did not reflect the result. As I said, it's one thing picking up the phone to a pollster and saying you'll vote for Trump, it's quite another to spend your evening at a caucus debating. I can see how some Trump supporters would be intimidated by the caucus process as it would've been their first time taking part (the polls showed Trump had a higher percentage of first time participants). I can also see some closet Trump supporters being embarrassed about airing their support in public (caucus participants have to sit in certain parts of the room depending on who they support).

When all they have to do is turn up at their local high school and put an x in a box behind a curtain I'm sure you'll see his support pick up. Carson has just withdrawn btw.

Rubio is the man now though. I actually think he should be fav for the big job.
 
Last edited:
Carson? - I knew Huckerbee had

I read Carson was going off to Florida to spend some time with his family, but the general view was that he'd turned the whole thing into a book tour and needed the ammunition.

Well that's a right wing constituency up for grabs, which way will it go? Mostly to Cruz I reckon
 
Warbler said:
Carson? - I knew Huckerbee had

I read Carson was going off to Florida to spend some time with his family, but the general view was that he'd turned the whole thing into a book tour and needed the ammunition.

Well that's a right wing constituency up for grabs, which way will it go? Mostly to Cruz I reckon
Click to expand...

Scratch that. I was typing whilst half listening to the news. Could swear I heard them say that but no mention of it since which strikes me as odd:p
 
Back
Top