Political betting (in the UK)

[tomorton]

The recent UK EU membership Referendum proved the largest non-sports betting event ever recorded. Even I was drawn in to place my first ever political bet (on Remain, so not the greatest of starts).

However, I then backed Turnbull in the Australian General Election and (eventually) they decided he'd won so that's a 50% record. I missed the chance to back Theresa May as next PM as I was waiting for the Aussie result to free up the necessary cash but have a stake on Hillary Clinton as next US President. Got to wait a few months for that one but confident she and I will both be happy in November.

Any suggestions for another good political bet in the meantime?

 

[hhiusa]

Although the German election is not until 2017, the AfD party is making great strides in popularity against Merkel's CDU.

Norway's is also in 2017.

I think the closest upcoming elections besides the US election, is the French presidential election in early 2017.

I hear that Macron is the only hope for beating Marine Le Pen.

 

[Oscar Reed]

Out side bet Marine Le Penn

 

[Oscar Reed]

Next Conservative Party Leader

Andrea Leadsom is 51/1

Theresa May a lot of work ahead and thing could go pear shape.

Being closer on the ground Tom do you have a tip for the next Labor Leader.

 

[counter_violent]

Just keep shorting the euro against everything....it's all going tits up now !

 

[hhiusa]

Just keep shorting the euro against everything....it's all going tits up now !

Indeed.

It is not the UK that is in a position of weakness, it is the EU. The EU just has not seen the negative ramifications of the Brexit yet. Bluff while you can EU. When the $h** happens, you will go to the UK like Oliver Twist saying, "please, more sir!"

 

[tomorton]

Being closer on the ground Tom do you have a tip for the next Labor Leader.

Corbyn will win (if the election even goes ahead - I really think both challengers will drop out Leadsom-style). I suspect Corbyn's opponents know they won't win a leadership election, that's why there was such a delay in fielding even a single candidate and then it turned out to be a no-mark, followed by another no-mark. A defeat for candidates like Eagle and Smith won't break up the rebel faction and won't be severely damaging to a big hitter who can come into play as a real contender with a loss-free record. For example, when a leader is to be deposed, it would be normal to be seeing his deputy, predecessor and recent victims line up as heirs to the throne. Watson, Milliband Minor and Benn appear to not want to get into this fight.

Labour leadership ballot will close at midday, Wednesday 21/09. Corbyn is currently 1.61 (8/13). Owen Smith 2.37 (11/8), Angela Eagle 13.00 (12/1). Not bad set-up and plenty of time to place this one.

 

[Trading Spaces]

www.politicalbetting.com

 

[timsk]

. . . but have a stake on Hillary Clinton as next US President. Got to wait a few months for that one but confident she and I will both be happy in November.

Hmm, I fear your success rate trading political outcomes may take a nose dive, Tom. Hillary's distinctly dodgy track record of turning a $1k into $100k in nine months trading (mostly) cattle futures back in the 90's will be her undoing. Citizens of the U.S. don't mind people making huge sums in next to no time, indeed, they applaud it. But, like the rest of us, they don't like being lied to. Trump is riddled with flaws but, as far as I know, he hasn't lied to the American people and there are no serious trust issues surrounding his candidacy in the way that there are with Hillary's. I wouldn't put money on the outcome of the election but, if I did, for this reason alone I'd go with big Don.
Tim.

 

[tomorton]

Hmm, I fear your success rate trading political outcomes may take a nose dive, Tom. Hillary's distinctly dodgy track record of turning a $1k into $100k in nine months trading (mostly) cattle futures back in the 90's will be her undoing. Citizens of the U.S. don't mind people making huge sums in next to no time, indeed, they applaud it. But, like the rest of us, they don't like being lied to. Trump is riddled with flaws but, as far as I know, he hasn't lied to the American people and there are no serious trust issues surrounding his candidacy in the way that there are with Hillary's. I wouldn't put money on the outcome of the election but, if I did, for this reason alone I'd go with big Don.
Tim.

I hope you're wrong about Clinton, though I wouldn't vote for her if I could.

As for Trump - well, alright, technically speaking, crazy people aren't liars, when they say insane things that don't relate to the real world. I think fantasist is the kindest label I could apply to this man.

 

[hhiusa]

Hmm, I fear your success rate trading political outcomes may take a nose dive, Tom. Hillary's distinctly dodgy track record of turning a $1k into $100k in nine months trading (mostly) cattle futures back in the 90's will be her undoing. Citizens of the U.S. don't mind people making huge sums in next to no time, indeed, they applaud it. But, like the rest of us, they don't like being lied to. Trump is riddled with flaws but, as far as I know, he hasn't lied to the American people and there are no serious trust issues surrounding his candidacy in the way that there are with Hillary's. I wouldn't put money on the outcome of the election but, if I did, for this reason alone I'd go with big Don.
Tim.

Are you saying that you think Trump will win?

 

[timsk]

Are you saying that you think Trump will win?

Hi hhiusa,
I'm saying that big Don's trump card (sorry, couldn't resist!) is that when push comes to shove at the tail end of campaigning, he and his supporters will ram home at every opportunity that Hillary can't be trusted. If she lied to the American people about her trading activities, who's to say she won't lie to them about something far more serious if she's elected to the White House. It knocks spots off her hubby's little indiscretion with Ms. Lewinsky. So yes, as much as I dislike Trump, I think he will win.
Tim.

 

[hhiusa]

Hi hhiusa,
I'm saying that big Don's trump card (sorry, couldn't resist!) is that when push comes to shove at the tail end of campaigning, he and his supporters will ram home at every opportunity that Hillary can't be trusted. If she lied to the American people about her trading activities, who's to say she won't lie to them about something far more serious if she's elected to the White House. It knocks spots off her hubby's little indiscretion with Ms. Lewinsky. So yes, as much as I dislike Trump, I think he will win.
Tim.

While your points may be valid, to complain about lying in a politician is extremely nonsensical. I do not think that will continue to hold water.

1. Let's us not forget about the huge Latino population who almost always vote Democratic because the Dems will protect them and/or their loved ones from deportation.
2. There is a greater percentage of Black voters in the Democratic ranks than in the Republicans. The minorities are not really in the minority anymore.
3. Let us also not forget how badly the Republican party has been factionalised due to Trump.
4. I have heard many Republican voters say that they simply will not vote because they do not like either.
5. Last but not least, California represents 55 electoral votes out of the 270 needed to win. California almost always votes Democrat. That is 20% of the vote right there.

Bernie has backed Hillary and will bring all his hipster socialist voters with him.

The same cannot be said about Trump.

I think it is something like 9% Black Republicans, 12% Latino Republicans, and 65% White Republicans.

I really do not care either way. If you are looking for an honest politician, you are beyond saving.

 

[tomorton]

Very reassuring hhiusa, and sounds convincing. Maybe in the UK we're still all a bit shocked by the EU exit vote - I include brexiters in that as well - the result was a very good demonstration of majority vote based on perception, hope, fear and resentment rather than actuality.

 

[hhiusa]

Very reassuring hhiusa, and sounds convincing. Maybe in the UK we're still all a bit shocked by the EU exit vote - I include brexiters in that as well - the result was a very good demonstration of majority vote based on perception, hope, fear and resentment rather than actuality.

Why do you care about the US election? I ask because you seem like you have a vested interest in it.

What actuality?

 

[tomorton]

Why do you care about the US election? I ask because you seem like you have a vested interest in it.

What actuality?

I didn't care about the US election until I put money on Clinton to win.

As for actuality, that relates to recognition of the strong UK economic performance while in the EU, as opposed to the vague notions that just about everything would be better if we weren't on it. All politicians love being vague about their objectives - its convenient they don't have specific key performance indicators which can be held against them when they don't achieve them. And Trump is a populist, he has an ability to appear more sincere and to be more willing to deal with awkward political issues - this makes him viable as a contender.

 

[hhiusa]

I didn't care about the US election until I put money on Clinton to win.

As for actuality, that relates to recognition of the strong UK economic performance while in the EU, as opposed to the vague notions that just about everything would be better if we weren't on it. All politicians love being vague about their objectives - its convenient they don't have specific key performance indicators which can be held against them when they don't achieve them. And Trump is a populist, he has an ability to appear more sincere and to be more willing to deal with awkward political issues - this makes him viable as a contender.

This is neither true nor false. There is no track record outside of the EU. It is a moot point. Additionally, they are being vague because there is indeed no track record to speak from. It would be irresponsible to be anything other than ambiguous. They are relying upon the fact that the UK is not a third-world dinky little EU member country. It is plenty capable of being self-sufficient.

By this logic, the Bremainers are doing the exact same thing. They are still fear mongering. I can say that because they have no more information than the Brexiters about the future. There is no track record yet for how well the UK will do outside the EU. It has not even left yet. They are being all doom and gloom before anything has really happened. Big deal the GBP/USD fell to $1.27 from $1.48. The banks were artificially pushing up the GBP/USD just in case of the Brexit. The money does not care about Bremain or Brexit. Money cares about making money regardless. Saving £200,000,000,000 per annum means more money for the UK politicians.

 

[Pat494]

I hope Clinton wins, even with all her lying etc. Chump is a wacko megalomaniac who may decide the US should rule the world aka another Adolf. Anywhere but America he would be in a padded cell.

 

[tomorton]

This is neither true nor false. There is no track record outside of the EU. It is a moot point. Additionally, they are being vague because there is indeed no track record to speak from. It would be irresponsible to be anything other than ambiguous. They are relying upon the fact that the UK is not a third-world dinky little EU member country. It is plenty capable of being self-sufficient.

By this logic, the Bremainers are doing the exact same thing. They are still fear mongering. I can say that because they have no more information than the Brexiters about the future. There is no track record yet for how well the UK will do outside the EU. It has not even left yet. They are being all doom and gloom before anything has really happened. Big deal the GBP/USD fell to $1.27 from $1.48. The banks were artificially pushing up the GBP/USD just in case of the Brexit. The money does not care about Bremain or Brexit. Money cares about making money regardless. Saving £200,000,000,000 per annum means more money for the UK politicians.

Yes, no argument that it is always going to be impossible to predict exactly the course of a project that has never been done before. And indeed, the Brexit voters may turn out to be right. But that won't be down to their rational analysis of actuality. So my point is not to do with whether Brexit is good or bad, its the observation that voters are liable to irrational decision-making. In our trader context, they are the equivalent of novice traders who can't analyse a newspaper or a chart and who enter trades on the emotions of hope and fear. In the political betting context, it means they are quite likely to elect Trump.

 

[hhiusa]

Yes, no argument that it is always going to be impossible to predict exactly the course of a project that has never been done before. And indeed, the Brexit voters may turn out to be right. But that won't be down to their rational analysis of actuality. So my point is not to do with whether Brexit is good or bad, its the observation that voters are liable to irrational decision-making. In our trader context, they are the equivalent of novice traders who can't analyse a newspaper or a chart and who enter trades on the emotions of hope and fear. In the political betting context, it means they are quite likely to elect Trump.

My main argument is that you speak of "actualities" as if they actually exist. They do not. You still have not said what "actuality" you are referring to. You even admitted that one "cannot predict the course of a project that has never been done before". That means no one knows what the truth will be yet. All analyses, even those from your "charts or newspaper" are pointless at this point.

All statements regarding the irrational behavior of voters are, just that, irrational. They are normative. What is this reality that you think "irrational voters" are avoiding?