Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk
Reload this Page >

My Presidential Wager is locked and loaded

Other Talk "Otterville" plus Religion/Politics

My Presidential Wager is locked and loaded

Old 08-12-04, 12:10 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,206
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
My Presidential Wager is locked and loaded

Given the lousy choices we are offered this election, and how the 2 major candidates will offer little difference in reality, I decided to try and make some money off this craptacular election.


Current Odds, courtesy sportsbook.com:
George Bush 5-6
John Kerry 1-1

Took Dubya for $180 to win $150. I was originally going to put a nickel on him, but I was a little gunshy about it. Still I can't ignore historical trends in the electoral college and what has been a completely lackluster campaign from the challenger.

So for the next 80 days, I say GO BUSH!!!
Old 08-12-04, 12:12 PM
  #2  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 70,876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lackluster campaign? Damn it man, they dropped BALLOONS. What more do you want?
Old 08-12-04, 12:12 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You still come out losing $30. What a lousy bet.


Old 08-12-04, 12:14 PM
  #4  
Enormous Genitals
 
Bandoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a small cottage on a cul de sac in the lower pits of hell.
Posts: 33,249
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
So now the Presidential election is nothing more than a game of chance? Way to reduce a citizen's most sacred privilege and duty to a base, crass money-making scheme, Red Dog.



(*psst* Can I put $100 on Kerry?)
Old 08-12-04, 12:26 PM
  #5  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,764
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
I think you have a fairly safe bet there. It sure looks like the Bush campaign waited to make sure that Kerry got the nomination and then opened up their arsenal.

If it makes any difference, this guy agrees with you...
Economist: Forget Polls; Bush Easily Wins

By E&P Staff

Published: August 11, 2004

NEW YORK For all you pundits and political reporters out there who think the Iraq war will have a major influence on the fall election, or who think the Bush-Kerry race is a toss-up, Yale University economist Ray C. Fair has a message for you: forget both. Iraq won't matter and Bush will win in a landslide.

In an interview to be published in next Sunday's "New York Times Magazine," Fair told Deborah Solomon, "My latest prediction shows that Bush will receive 57.5% of the two-party votes ... the chances that Bush loses are very small."

Fair, who claims to be a Kerry supporter, is described by the Times in the Aug. 15 issue as being known for creating an econometric equation that "has predicted presidential elections with relative accuracy." His most recent book, in fact, is titled, "Predicting Presidential Elections and Other Things."

How does he explain media expectations of a close race? Polls are "notoriously flaky this far ahead of the election," he said, while his model has allegedly proven accurate to within 2.5%.

Economic growth and inflation are really the only things that matter in a presidential race, he argues, with the current war and social issues such as gay marriage having negligible impact.

Asked if his prediction will boost Bush's prospects, Fair replied, "If Kerry supporters see that I have made this big prediction for Bush, more of them could turn out just to prove an economist wrong."

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1000610745
Old 08-12-04, 12:34 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,206
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by X
I think you have a fairly safe bet there. It sure looks like the Bush campaign waited to make sure that Kerry got the nomination and then opened up their arsenal.

If it makes any difference, this guy agrees with you...

My main concern about Bush was quite simple. I am a student of history which is why I generally ignore polls, particularly national polls. However, I think polls (specifically approval ratings) and how they relate to previous elections are worth looking at. As such, there is a historical pattern where an incumbent with less than a 50% approval rating at this stage in the race goes on to lose. Certainly cause for concern if you like Bush.

That being said, I looked at those recent precedents: Bush-92, Carter-80, and Ford-76 and in 2 of those, there was a dynamic opponent (Reagan and Clinton) that could play an audience very well. We clearly do not have that here. In the case of Ford, Watergate was just such a huge factor that he couldn't overcome it, although he almost did, making up a huge amount of ground in the last weeks of the election season.

Therefore any such concern I had is trumped by Kerry's general lameness and electoral college math and precedent.
Old 08-12-04, 12:35 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NEW YORK For all you pundits and political reporters out there who think the Iraq war will have a major influence on the fall election, or who think the Bush-Kerry race is a toss-up, Yale University economist Ray C. Fair has a message for you: forget both. Iraq won't matter and Bush will win in a landslide.
Are we permitted to respectfully disagree with the Yale University economist?
Old 08-12-04, 12:40 PM
  #8  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,764
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by classicman2
Are we permitted to respectfully disagree with the Yale University economist?
Yes. Especially with an economist. But who wins will probably be the same.
Old 08-12-04, 12:43 PM
  #9  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,764
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by Red Dog
Therefore any such concern I had is trumped by Kerry's general lameness and electoral college math and precedent.
I agree with you.

People have to have someone they really want to go with to dump an incumbent. Not merely the desire to dump the incumbent.
Old 08-12-04, 12:50 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by X
I agree with you.

People have to have someone they really want to go with to dump an incumbent. Not merely the desire to dump the incumbent.
Yep, with the exception of a Nixon. And it would have to be that bad, imo to get rid of Bush. Otherwise, most swing people don't want to rock the boat if things ar generally okay.
Old 08-12-04, 12:57 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by kvrdave
Otherwise, most swing people don't want to rock the boat if things ar generally okay.
Yeah, but it's been a living hell, remember? Kerry should easily take 90% of the popular vote. Nobody likes hell.
Old 08-12-04, 01:02 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Working in the "evil" pharmaceutical industry booga booga
Posts: 7,991
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Thor Simpson
Yeah, but it's been a living hell, remember? Kerry should easily take 90% of the popular vote. Nobody likes hell.
Beelzebub does.
Old 08-12-04, 01:11 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember that betting and gambling lines are made to put EVEN MONEY on both sides and not neccesarily have ANYTHING TO DO with who will win or who the person taking the best thinks will win. They person taking the bets doesn't care at all if they just take home their percentage.
I have been betting a KERRY FAVORITE with many people at 3:2 odds. People that like Bush want to bet Bush and think he will win. The inside of each campaign have real polling in big states that goes on all the time (those millions of dollars go to big-time polling as well as ads). At this moment (Aug 11) the Kerry insiders are far happier than any Bush insider. I'll post many of my odds thoughts below.
hope to not get flamed for this, but here we go. First, some background: I majored in Statistics at University of Florida and as well as having a Masters in International Business and a strong interest in demographics and polling. I admit to leaning Democrat, but I grew up in Alabama and supported the invasion in Iraq. I do however have some connections family wise to Democrats. All this leads to the following:
The best kept secret in the country right now is how much of a landslide we are looking at on election day for Kerry. The numbers against Bush when you get "inside the numbers" are staggering. The election (as of this moment) is OVER. When you see the Kerry people smiling on TV during the talking heads interviews it is for a reason (they firmly believe what I am writing now). Bush must find Osama or a major event must occur that changes the race completely (a terrorist attack happens or a major gaffe or political landscape change). The Democratic pollsters are keeping it quiet so as to have the monster turnout to throw Bush out (any early bragging just pisses people off or lowers your turnout). Now you want facts. The nationwide polls you see show small Kerry leads with 6-10% undecided. The undecideds are the issue that is killing Bush. These people will vote and when forced to choose they are breaking for Kerry heavily. Undecideds and swing voters are NOT overly religious, they are almost never wealthy, they are a higher percentage women, and a higher percentage minority than the population. Almost NO ONE making $150,000 a year and up has not made up their mind on this election (they are firm one way or the other). Bush won by the SMALLEST of margins in 2000. HE MUST POLL BETTER TO BE RE-ELECTED. Turnout will be up (maybe huge). The money raised by the Democrats across the board shows more base motivation and more cross-over appeal. The Deomcrats have never before had so much money come there way. Did you know that one million GAY VOTERS voted for Bush in 2000? Will they still? Did you know that many more Bush voters have died since 2000 than Gore voters (Bush's base is older on average). In an election that was a statistical tie last time the information is in demographic changes. We have a new census report. Ohio went 4% Bush in 2000 and was the hardest hit state for the economy and job loss. Internal polls show Kerry leading outside the margin of error in Ohio (sorry, no source). Florida has added a NET GAIN of 92,500 registered Democrats over Republicans in the last 4 years. Remember that all the News Organizations had Gore winning Florida by 1% or so and called it early. That 1% will almost certainly have less voter issues this time around. Economic voters are breaking for Kerry huge (as much as 60-35 for people that the economy is issue #1).
Don't forget that BOTH CAMPAIGNS have new census info for this election. The Bush people know what they are up against (they are very worried right now on the inside). The demographics moved against Bush in the realm of 2-4% in the last 4 years (more blacks, more Hispanics, more women, less white men making $200,000 a year). And the economic numbers that were awful over the last few months (Dow down 300 points in 2 days last week) sealed the deal. Rove and the Bush team were planning their Fall push on strong job gains but that just disappeared on Friday. That Friday jobs number (only 32,000 jobs made in July when we need 100,000 a month to simply keep up with population inflation) was one of the largest blows for Karl Rove to this point. I know many of you will strongly disagree, and if you do disagree, I won't argue violently. You'll note that I am not asking you to vote my way or convince anyone of a position. We won't know the outcome until November 2. But all my knowledge and schooling to this point shows this to be all Kerry (from a polling and inside the numbers standpoint).
It is also all grounded in reality and stats, but you can get other stats to say other things (any stat major knows that is rule #1). The question is what stats, polls, trends and changes make sense and have real value. Demographics and population changes are hard to ignore. If Black voters voted 90-10 AGAINST Bush in 2000 and they are a higher percentage of voters in 2004 that is bad for Bush and it can't be spun any other way. I was born in Florida, graduated from UF with undergrad and graduate degrees, but haven't lived there in 3 years. I can tell you for a fact that if the Republicans cannot break through to Hispanic, Latino, Black and other minority voters then they have no chance in Florida in the coming years (this election 2004 will be the last time the numbers are even close, as the "minorities" begin to take over Florida from this point on). It was tied last time in Florida and the numbers are better for the Dems this time.
Remember that in an election the most important thing at the end is TURNOUT. 4 years ago the Republicans (after 8 years out of office) were feverish to remove Clinton and the Dems. Do you not think the Republicans mined every vote they could in Florida 4 years ago? Now fast forward 4 years and the tables are turned. Dems hate Bush with a passion on the far left, have donated more money than ever, and many feel that their VOTE WAS NOT COUNTED. I am telling you, I was in Florida in 2000. People get upset when they think their vote didn't count. The Republicans cannot counter in Florida on that level. No Republican in Florida feels their vote didn't count.
The Dems insiders are happy to win with either Ohio or Florida switching, but Florida is where the passion is. Everyone believes that turnout will increase huge on the Dems side but can Republicans match it? You can bet they will try. The Republicans have done great work mobilizing church groups, veterans, seniors, etc. but that is old hat this time. There aren't enough new votes in that bucket, and you fought tooth and nail for all those votes last time. The Republicans know their voters on average(ESPECIALLY in Florida alone) are older, more afraid of terrorism (honestly), and have shown small cracks against Bush. When you won a state by a tie, even the tiniest cracks in your base are worrisome. Internal polling continues to show that a Gore voter in 2000 is very hesitant to support Bush in 2004. They know George Bush, they have seen him for 4 years, and they voted against him 4 years ago. Every Republican that slips away from Bush must be made up, and then they must make up the turnout issue and the demographics. It looks tough for the Republicans (even as the incumbents), because it is.
No President has every polled at this level in August and been re-elected. What you do with all these small changes or movements is chart them and keep tabs. Keep in mind this is something that no one can control or manipulate. What you find is that probably 80% of demographic check marks seem to go on the Kerry column. As another example, when pressed I have heard no one who believes that Nader will pull even the same number of votes in 2004 as he did in 2000 in any state. Nader was on the ballot in 43 states last time and that number will fall as well. That was a minus for Gore, but this time it is a plus for Kerry.
The demographic changes since 2000 in the major swing states, especially Florida, and in swing states generally, have favoured the Dems. The only swing states in which the GOP feels the demographic changes have benefited them since 2000 are Wisconsin, Minnesota, Washington and Oregon. And they may not be close enough in the underlying national trends to take advantage of this; they currently trail in state polls in all 4 states;
The likely split of the undecided is very important, though I would keep in mind that we're talking about general characteristics; if 10% of the pop is undecided, they're not going to split much if any better than 6-4 Kerry anyway, which is a 2% national advantage -- nice, but not necessarily decisive. I believe that is what is behind Rove's oft-repeated cryptic maxim "this election won't be decided by the undecided". Here is a great link on UNDECIDED voters: http://www.goringe.net/tis/archives/001090.html
(Side note: Rove is also fanatical about the Hispanic vote, and Hispanic immigration may sink the GOP eventually. However Rove's reported wisdom is that the GOP took 35% of the Hispanic vote last time and needs 40% to win in 2004. A recent story claimed that GOP internal polling has consistently shown them at 38/39 at best [margin of error makes this just a good story, but I like it anyway]).
Bush lost the popular vote last time. He needs to improve nationally (against demographics sliding in Kerry's favor) by 2.5% points to win by 2 points, which even with electoral college issues would certainly put him in the White House again. If Bush does that, he wins.
Bush can only improve his national percentage by
1. Increasing republican turnout more than the Dems increase their turnout (highly unlikely)
2. Stealing Gore votes (or another 3rd party candidate) from 2000 and having them vote for Bush in 2004. (far more likely option)
3. Bush having a winning percentages on first time voters, new voters, irregular voters, etc. (voters that come out for an election and don't usually vote go heavily towards challengers and change, making this unlikely as well)
However, given even the best polls for Bush, coupled with the undecideds breaking for Kerry even by a small margin, nothing shows Bush polling at 2 percent ahead, or even ahead at all. My analysis actually would show more like a 5-6% national point win for Kerry. Once again, BUSH MUST POLL BETTER IN 2004 than 2000 to be RE-ELECTED. As of now, and CNNs head polling guy even said this, "There are no more than a couple states in the USA where Bush is currenly polling better in 2004 than 2000." That is bad news for Bush. We will see for sure on Nov. 2nd.
Bush still wins on terror but that difference has been trimmed way back. The "safer danger" (meaning they say we are in danger, but we are safer than before) terror warnings aren't playing as well nationwide after 5 times around, and people in the know have begun to realize that you can't get the public in fear, and also grow the economy. It is a Catch 22 for the Bush team right now. The Dems feel that in the end if either Ohio or Florida turn to them they win (and if you really study the electoral college that certainly seems true). Switch Ohio or Florida from Bush in 2000 to Kerry in 2004 and Kerry wins (the other numbers just can't add up for Bush). The "liberal" states that Gore won by more than 3% all seem to be locked in for Kerry meaning he can afford to focus on Ohio alone, with Florida settling for 2nd.
A new Time.com major article just firmed up a number of my points above that I said have come to bear in the last 24-48 hours. You can find that article here: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....tm/index.html
The main points from the article and I quote:
"In the three-day poll, conducted after the alert level was raised, just 21 percent of likely voters reported being "very worried" about a terrorist attack in the near future -- which was only slightly higher than the 17 percent who described themselves that way in mid-July. Voters' main concern continued to be the economy -- cited by 27 percent as their top priority.

That was virtually unchanged from two weeks before and suggests that last week's disappointing employment numbers may have more political impact than the terrorism alert. In July only 32,000 new jobs were created, which was about 200,000 fewer than expected. Only 19 percent of likely voters polled cited the war on terrorism as their main concern, the same percentage that named either the war in Iraq or moral issues like gay marriage and abortion as most important in determining whom they will vote for in November.

All of which helps explain why the chilling news has done little more than leave the presidential race frozen in place. TIME's poll showed the lead remains within the margin of error, with Kerry ahead of Bush 48 percent to 43 percent among likely voters, with Ralph Nader receiving 4 percent, and a mere 3 percent of those polled saying they are undecided.

Yet a closer look at the numbers suggests that the impressions voters have of Kerry have shifted in the wake of the Boston convention, with its theme of strength, its spotlight on the candidate's war record in Vietnam and its cast of featured speakers who would have looked more at home in a VFW hall than at Democratic gatherings in the past.

Kerry is gaining ground on the very issues that Bush had been assuming would be his own. The gap on the question of which candidate would provide "strong leadership in difficult times" has been cut in half since July, with Bush winning out, 49 percent to 44 percent. The two are dead even at 47 percent on the question of which man voters would trust more to be Commander in Chief. And likely voters expressed virtually equal amounts of confidence in Bush and Kerry to lead the war on terrorism, with 61 percent saying they would trust Kerry and 62 percent saying they would put their faith in Bush.

Meanwhile, the fallout from the 9/11 commission and the terrorism alerts reveals that Bush may have developed some vulnerabilities on the issue that is considered his greatest strength. Bush tried to walk a delicate line with the commission: he supported its recommendation to create a new national intelligence director but wouldn't give the position the power that comes only with budget authority. That avoided a bitter turf war within his Administration, but it left him open to charges -- not only from Kerry but also from Republican members of the commission -- that he was dodging real reform.

The commission's Republican chairman Tom Kean even went so far as to tell TIME that the watered-down version of the recommendations as initially proposed by Bush would be a "waste of time." Kerry, on the other hand, has said he would adopt all the commission's recommendations if elected, although some in his party are wary of certain proposals, such as one for national identification cards. The challenger has argued he would protect the homeland better than Bush has, by increasing spending, setting national standards for community responses to terrorist attacks and improving port security.

In what may be an even more dangerous development for the President, the announcement of new terrorism alerts so soon after the Democratic Convention invited suspicion that the Administration was cranking up fears to scare voters into sticking with the leader they know. In the TIME poll a surprisingly large 40 percent of those asked said they believed the Administration was not above using a terrorism alert for political reasons."

The above tells me that the ABB vote is now almost 40% (which seems to match the 40% Republicans have in the bag).

Just released CNN article claims demographic changes have resulted in a NET of 92,500 increase in Democratic voters in Florida versus ACTUAL votes in 2004. Pretty interesting. Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html
Here are the high points: BEGIN QUOTE
The Kerry campaign believes it can win Florida, partly because of rising populations of black and Hispanic voters, who lean Democratic.

The population change, the Kerry campaign says, translates into a net increase of more than 92,500 Democratic votes -- when using the same turnout and vote percentages as 2000.

The campaign also notes that both of Florida's senators are Democrats. And there are Democratic mayors in Orlando, Daytona and Tampa -- three heavily populated areas of the Interstate 4 corridor, an area that stretches east-west across the state's midsection.END QUOTE

I'll say again, the only Bush people in the country that are sure he is going to win (any true Republican is very worried that has seen these numbers) are the Bush people that are hard-core Bush and have not seen any internal polling or talked to any of the insiders. The Bush people will never tell their supporters this info. Watch the next time the Kery or Bush people talk on TV and try to read their mind. You will see it. Its all Kerry's to lose at this point, but still the RNC to come and 10 weeks of time.
Old 08-12-04, 01:11 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 25,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hell, I looked at my tax cut, and I like it, too.
Old 08-12-04, 01:14 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
johnglad - I appreciate all of that. But knowing that Red Dog doesn't like either and wouldn't vote for either (except that now he has money on it), I think he is a pretty neutral guy on the subject.
Old 08-12-04, 01:16 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,206
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I never said I was sure that Bush would win but at 5-6, I really like those odds, and as any horse racing fan will tell you, gambling is all about finding value in the odds.

Heck, if I could get 3-2 on Kerry, I would bet that.

And as indicated, calling me a Bush person (politically) is the biggest error you will see in this forum today (and any day). I'm in this for the money. I couldn't care less, politically, who wins.
Old 08-12-04, 01:20 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Red Dog

And as indicated, calling me a Bush person (politically) is the biggest error you will see in this forum today (and any day). I'm in this for the money. I couldn't care less, politically, who wins.
I am an animal lover.

Top that, beyotch!
Old 08-12-04, 01:23 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
das Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 35,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red Dog

And as indicated, calling me a Bush person (politically) is the biggest error you will see in this forum today (and any day).
It's amazing how often this happens around here (and probably everywhere else). If you don't choose a side, someone else will choose one for you!

I think you know how I feel on this: you've made a wise bet. I'd love even money odds, but 5-6 is still solid.

das
Old 08-12-04, 01:24 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red-Dog I wasn't meaning to call you a "Bush person" at all. If I did it was just a poor choice of words. As a bettor you can choose anything you want. I meant to say that many of the "Bushies" out there don't know, or wouldn't even believe, the info I posted above. Nothing meant to you at all. I was commenting on the odds and that written up already from another web forum a day or 2 ago. No offense meant at all.
Old 08-12-04, 01:26 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 25,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Red Dog

Heck, if I could get 3-2 on Kerry, I would bet that.

Especially if you could combine it with your other bet?
Old 08-12-04, 01:26 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,206
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
Red-Dog I wasn't meaning to call you a "Bush person" at all. If I did it was just a poor choice of words. As a bettor you can choose anything you want. I meant to say that many of the "Bushies" out there don't know, or wouldn't even believe, the info I posted above. Nothing meant to you at all. I was commenting on the odds and that written up already from another web forum a day or 2 ago. No offense meant at all.

I just hope you didn't type all that out for my sake.
Old 08-12-04, 01:27 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Before you all posted above I didn't even know I had offended anybody, as I wasn't even commenting directly to Red-Dog. Just cut and pasted pretty much.
Old 08-12-04, 01:29 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 10,614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Your gonna lose!




Go Kerry
Old 08-12-04, 01:29 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,206
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by OldDude
Especially if you could combine it with your other bet?

Well if Kerry should slip to 3-2, I could just bet that and have both sides covered.

For example, I now have $180 to win $150 on Bush.
If Kerry were to slip to 3-2, I could then put $180 to win $270 on Kerry. I can't lose more than $30. If Kerry wins, I win $90.


I think you know how I feel on this: you've made a wise bet. I'd love even money odds, but 5-6 is still solid.

He was 10-11 a couple weeks ago. His odds actually went down after the Democratic convention which is certainly not what I anticipated.
Old 08-12-04, 01:31 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the TIME poll a surprisingly large 40 percent of those asked said they believed the Administration was not above using a terrorism alert for political reasons."
Since both candidates are in the 40% range - that's a meaningless statistic - pure partisans make up that number.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.