that probably should have said
you cant force someone with a spine to support someone in perpetuity if they win an election.
The bookies aren't trying to predict who wins or fair odds. They set odds to encourage people to bet both sides so that their margin makes them a profit no matter the outcome. Essentially if everyone bets Trump they will change the odds to encourage people to vote Biden or Santis and adjust as required going forward.
It does work a little like a crowd sourced poll but instead of asking who you will vote for it asks who do you think others will vote for which is a bit less accurate.
Stuff like paying out on a Hilary win too early is partially down to them thinking she would win but also probably far more a case of case of they had F all bets on the contest and it was a cheap way to get their name in the paper by paying out.
Bookies odds are accurate, just not this far out from a contest. They are slightly more reliable than opinion polling becasue people are being asked the question 'who do you think will win' and then putting their own money behind their decision. When money is on the line people act more rationally and with less emotion. Whereas opinion polling only asks for voting intention with a section of the respondents not even voting on the day anyway and also people have been proven to lie to pollsters, the Shy Tory phenomenon is a real thing.
But as said they are not accurate this far out from an election becasue they are ebbing and flowing with news cycles. Its not until the final few weeks of a campaign that they tighten up and at that point they are a more accurate predictor of an elections outcome than opinion polls, albeit by a marginal amount.
The only thing they are useful for this far out from an election is covering the candidates you think are in the mix to win it becasue their odds are longer than their actual chance of winning it. Ive been following it and backing candidates when I see crazy odds relative to their chances. Currently I have money on Pompeo at 40/1, deSantis at 10/1 and Im waiting for Biden to drift out to 7 or 8/1 and I'll back him then. Its actually crazy that Biden is 5/1 right now when he is the presumptive nominee in a two horse race but that just goes to show how volatile odds are this far out from an election. Pompeo at 40/1 is just nuts becasue if Trump isnt running then he definitely is. He didnt lose 6 stones in weight for nothing and he is lining up a run depending on what happens to Trump.
Plus, he too is turning orange...
Cry harder!
Rats eating each other. It's great to see frankly ....
Surely they see the tactic of claiming everything is a fraud if it doesn’t go their way gets slightly diluted every time they roll it out. They are also setting them self up as the boy who cries wolf, at some stage there may actually be some fraud and it will just be ignored as the ramblings of morons.
Chronic. These people are either too thick to see the damage they're doing to their own country, or they don't care. I'm not sure which one is worse.
Most Republicans used to be "Party before Country". Now it seems they're just "Me, before Party and Country".
That is exactly what they are hoping for. So when the Dems cry foul for gerrymandering etc it will be laughed off as 'exactly the same when you refused to accept the fraud'
It's the latter. They don't care.
What we seeing in certain parts of US politics is the corporate ladder climber writ large. Climbing a ladder is their job, which they'll do any way they can. They don't actually perform any real function. They're just there for promotion, like their counterparts in the corporate world. This was displayed beautifully by Donald Trump, who managed to climb the ladder to the highest office in the land despite being uniquely unqualified to do the job. Into the bargain it's role he has no real interest in carrying out and it's just something he wants because it benefits him in numerous ways, not least monetarily through the grifting of poor saps who are in need of a leader.
These people are sociopaths. They'll take route one to achieve their goal and they won't care who they step on to get there either. If the entire country goes to hell, then so be it.
Democrats have claimed 2000, 2004 and 2016 elections were either rigged, stolen or illegitimate...
One or two of those claims actially had basis though.
Did they try and storm the capitol as a result? No, they didn't so stop with the false equivalency
False equivalency. That term gets thrown around all the time, generally any opinion that is different to accepted orthodoxies around here.
So, if Jan 6 never happened would it then be ok to question the 2020 election they way it's ok to question every election Democrats lose?
Interesting. What was the basis?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how'd you like the play?"
FFS.
the democrats didn't continue to claim that the elected president was illegitimate for years. they accepted the result even if some questioned it.
They still claim to this day that Donal Trump was an illegitimate president.
Who are "they?"
Democrats as in, its the position of the DNC that he was an illegitimate president? Congress members? Senators? President Biden?
Because it is absolutely the position of the defacto leader of the GOP and many senior members that TFG won the 2020 election.
Now that's a false equivalency.
Hilary Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Jamie Raskin etc etc
There's a world of difference between a candidate refusing to accept the results of an election and assorted randomers claiming that the election wasn't fair.
In 2016 Hillary Clinton conceded (maybe reluctantly), but did not try to overturn the result. In 2000/01 Al Gore was beaten by just a handful of votes in Florida, went to court, lost, and conceded. He would have had much more cause to disrupt things than Trump's mob, but he accepted defeat gracefully. Your assertions about the Democrats are total rubbish.
Thought you said, 'to this day.' That was a quote from 2017 by Raskin. Got any from 2022? And I don't think Jimmy Carter has any impact on the Democratic party anymore and, hey, he wasn't wrong about Russian interference. Plus that interview was in 2019.
So, who in the Democratic party are saying TFG was an illegitimate president today?
HRC
Again, 2019.
Really? Tell that to Ashlee Babitt and Brian Sicknick.
They're both dead. As results of the insurrection. Now, maybe Babitt volunteered to be killed, but Sicknick didn't volunteer to die from a stroke.
We won't even go into the Capitol PD injuries sustained, but you can watch the Jan 6 committee hearings, just the first one, for all the details on that.
Can you support the claim that they said they were stolen or rigged?
Illegitimate has been used alright. But I don’t recall anyone worth listening to ever claimed they were stolen
Firstly election interference was very much so a thing so it's entirely fair to raise the issue that a foreign state took extreme measures to affect an election as Russia has attempted across the globe. However she never claimed something like fraud which implies the voter's choice was overridden, basically a complete failure of the electoral system. The actual claim of fraud literally went through the courts multiple times and was proven to be bullshit. Then using this claim to push an insurrection. So nope, you're not comparing like with like. Meanwhile he continues to claim fraud.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a1ab66d2930fae678721a95487f32205.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbba4c22aa1d352d2cdbb076e36aea8c.svg)