Trumps decision to continue his feud with Megan Kelly, and to frame his impact through "ratings" just encapsulates so much about the thin skinned, vindicative, bullying, grudge bearing, ego driven maniac. Having said that, he's launching his own alternative event (the success of which will doubtless be ratings driven or something other half baked approval proxy). He's also turning this event into a fundraiser for veterans (that could be a smart move). I think we can also assume that this event will turn into something of a 'rally' (and Americans love a rally to whoop and holler at). If he brings along his wailing banshee (and she only needs a 5 figure wardrobe budget and suite in a 5-star in Des Moines) there has to be a chance they can drum up a better media spectacle than some staid old debate where he'd be just 1 of 8 on a stage going through the same questions all over again. The last time he didn't make a debate he was banned of course and this played into his narrative. This time he looks churlish. There was nothing wrong with what Megan Kelly asked him, but he launched into charcater assassination of her (mind you, she did name one of her children 'Thatcher' - I mean, she should be done for cruelty!)
I think there's another angle to work from a betting perspective too, and that concerns the influence exerted by professional opinion formers and media comment. Remember these guys (and gals) reputations hang on being correct. This means they're predisposed towards strike rates rather than value. They'd rather get 9 out of 10 odds on shots right, then land the occasional 20/1 shot from the blue. For this reason contrarian opinion tends to only be served up for academic purposes and balance. Very few dissenting voices will risk identifying themselves against a concensus. Far better to be one amongst a group of people who called it wrong, than be isolated for sticking youir neck out. But in a lot of cases these 'pundits' are jumped poll junkies. Their guess isn't that much more informed than Joe Soaps
I think Cruz 6/4 is probably is a bit over the odds. I'm still not convinced Trumps vote in Iowa is as strong as Trump thinks it is. I think it might be worth following that through a bit though and trying to work out what the market reaction would be and how prices will subsequently respond. This might be an occasion where you could place inter-related bets without falling foul of related contingency?
One almost unique thing to consider with Iowa is that this is a caucus, it's not a secret ballot primary. You have to spend about 2 hours huddled in some freezing church hall listening to speeches from the local looney pastor and party apparatchiks, with contributions from the caucus goers. When this 'debate' is over you all can stand in a part of the room assigned to the person who you support. In other words, its open to intimidation and bullying, whether that's Chuck Chainsaw or the Reverand Vengeful
