Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » But would these slightly poplist/popular (but yet contraversial) remarks have aided him, or hindered that's perhaps the big question.
Phoebas wrote: » The reason the media are running it as news is because a week out from the vote, the result of a national opinion poll is news.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Not an exact indicator of course, but somewhat 'useful' along with various polls, is the bookie markets. Of course no one of any sense is going to bet on the wee man for just a 3% ROI/PTE, but some might consider Casey a 'value option'.
Phoebas wrote: » He's a no-hoper and he knows it, so he's playing a desperate 'trump' card on a gamble to get his expenses. Some people are always willing to fall for this stuff. For the life of me, I can't figure out what it contributes to a presidential debate, and I'd be pretty certain that the voting public will see it the same way on Friday.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Yes his % will grow. No doubt about that. Is the anger among the demographic that will actually vote is anybody's guess.
The latest opinion poll on the presidential election shows Mr Casey has doubled his support to 2pc.
Phoebas wrote: » I think if you were looking for a 'value' bet from that list Mairead McGuinness is the one to go for.
dav3 wrote: » Mairead McGuinness?
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Or could look for gold in them there mountains. She is only listed with one bookie, the rest won't even accept or consider her as a candidate.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Value also implies 'some chance' as well as generous odds. So nope on that.
Phoebas wrote: » I'd put Mairead McGuiness' chances at about on par with Casey's.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Cool, maybe dont' start a bookie shop. The only shop that will take bets on her imply she has 15% chance (500/1) compared to Casey (67-81/1) as of today.
dav3 wrote: » 15% chance of what?
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Cool, maybe dont' start a bookie shop.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » She has only 15% chance of winning (or getting more votes) - when compared directly to Casey.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » She has only 15% chance of winning (or getting more votes) - when compared directly to Casey. And Casey is still considered very much as an outside chance. Most markets won't even consider her as an actual candidate.
Phoebas wrote: » Good advice. I'd extend it to anyone thinking about putting money on Casey being the next President of Ireland - don't go into a bookie shop.
Kamden Fit Worker wrote: » Indeed, I'd never bet on a 'single event' such as this. Only as part of an Acca 'line selection' whereby there is significant risk reduction, combined with reduced stakes and increased odds. This market (below) is interesting, but unfortunately can't be combined with other events.
Johnny Dogs wrote: » The best PR Casey could have wished for, and which will undoubtedly result in him getting a huge surge of votes will be on the back of Leo's attempt st meddling in the election by advising people not to vote for Casey. The people don't like being told what to do Leo. **shakes finger at Leo **
WoolyJumper wrote: » I love the amount of people voting for Peter Casey but not knowing a single thing about him other that what he said about Travellers. As much as I might agree with what he said I literally know nothing about him or what he stands for so in my right mind I can't vote for him. 7 years is a long time in office.
Johnny Dogs wrote: » 14 years is longer.
WoolyJumper wrote: » Of course what I mean is 7 years is a long time to put someone in office when you know nothing about them other than one semi right wing thing he said (though as someone who considers themselves liberal I actually agree with what he said) I just think people see him as some kind of right wing tell it like it is Trump figure based on that one thing. Even though he later tried to distance himself from what he said saying he doesn't want to be elected on the basis of that. I don't think he is the right wing "saviour" people are expecting him to be
