45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.

[scherzkeks]

rscott said:

amusingduck said:

They all said pretty much the same thing - that Hillary Rodham Clinton would undoubtedly be the next POTUS.

What did that tell us, unpalatable or otherwise?

I'll bite. It told us that the polling companies didn't do a very good job.

Ah yes, the equivalent of "bad intelligence" during the buildup to our illustrious campaign to free Iraqis of their oil.

[Halmyre]

jmorgan said:

Halmyre said:

jmorgan said:

Thought Gove had been ejected into a black hole or something. Can we put him and Farage into the Thunderdome?

Edited by jmorgan on Monday 16th January 06:28

Hmm, two men enter, one man leave; that's not a good outcome. Can we change the rules to read "two men and a starving tiger enter..."?

Not thought this through had I. However, there must be an incentive to win so tiger at the stage where one is doomed, just so they cannot start to work together to overcome tiger.

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

[B'stard Child]

Halmyre said:

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

The bookies had Remain to win...............

I'd want to make sure I got the best odds before putting money on the outcome - as a result Gove v Farage then winner takes on the tiger....

Then thro in Corbyn as like an after dinner snack

[Esseesse]

rscott said:

amusingduck said:

They all said pretty much the same thing - that Hillary Rodham Clinton would undoubtedly be the next POTUS.

What did that tell us, unpalatable or otherwise?

I'll bite. It told us that the polling companies didn't do a very good job. Pretty much all the media who supported her regularly mentioned her lead in the various polls..

Alternative media noticed that the polling significantly oversampled democrats a long time before the election.

[anonymous-user]

Love his comments about Merkel

[Countdown]

B'stard Child said:

Halmyre said:

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

The bookies had Remain to win...............

I stand to be corrected but don't the bookies base the odds in line with the way the bets are being placed? In other words they simply reflect how the best are being placed?

They don't suggest who is going to win/lose, their odds reflect who the betting public is going to win/lose.

[B'stard Child]

Countdown said:

B'stard Child said:

Halmyre said:

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

The bookies had Remain to win...............

I stand to be corrected but don't the bookies base the odds in line with the way the bets are being placed? In other words they simply reflect how the best are being placed?

They don't suggest who is going to win/lose, their odds reflect who the betting public is going to win/lose.

There was some interesting discussion pre the referendum in a topic about betting odds - several PH'rs pointed out that the odds were based on one thing but the volume of bets placed (ignoring £ amount bet) told a different picture - can't find that thread right now but I'll have a go again later

[WestyCarl]

Do you think Trump's photographer is secretly has a bet with his mates to make trump look some grinning idiot and as for Gove

[TEKNOPUG]

B'stard Child said:

Countdown said:

B'stard Child said:

Halmyre said:

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

The bookies had Remain to win...............

I stand to be corrected but don't the bookies base the odds in line with the way the bets are being placed? In other words they simply reflect how the best are being placed?

They don't suggest who is going to win/lose, their odds reflect who the betting public is going to win/lose.

There was some interesting discussion pre the referendum in a topic about betting odds - several PH'rs pointed out that the odds were based on one thing but the volume of bets placed (ignoring £ amount bet) told a different picture - can't find that thread right now but I'll have a go again later

Starting odds will be what the bookies think based upon available data. The prices will then move with the bets being places. What happens though is you get punters who see one result shorten and jump on aboard, thinking that everyone else must know something. So Remain price got driven shorter and shorter buy people backing it based purely on it's short price as the favourite. I got 13/2 to on Brexit the day before polling - seemed a crazy price when 9/10 people I had spoken to in previous months were for Brexit. Lots of lovely free money for me

Same thing happened at the GE. I think a Tory majority was something daft like 8/1. The lesson to be learnt is that the polls and odds are pretty worthless when it comes to what way people will vote. You can't look at form or any historical hard data.

[Halmyre]

WestyCarl said:

Do you think Trump's photographer is secretly has a bet with his mates to make trump look some grinning idiot and as for Gove

Gove: "I'll just put my other hand here in case he makes a grab"

[MDMetal]

TEKNOPUG said:

B'stard Child said:

Countdown said:

B'stard Child said:

Halmyre said:

Gove and Farage working together versus tiger? My money's still on the stripy one with the big teeth.

The bookies had Remain to win...............

I stand to be corrected but don't the bookies base the odds in line with the way the bets are being placed? In other words they simply reflect how the best are being placed?

They don't suggest who is going to win/lose, their odds reflect who the betting public is going to win/lose.

There was some interesting discussion pre the referendum in a topic about betting odds - several PH'rs pointed out that the odds were based on one thing but the volume of bets placed (ignoring £ amount bet) told a different picture - can't find that thread right now but I'll have a go again later

Starting odds will be what the bookies think based upon available data. The prices will then move with the bets being places. What happens though is you get punters who see one result shorten and jump on aboard, thinking that everyone else must know something. So Remain price got driven shorter and shorter buy people backing it based purely on it's short price as the favourite. I got 13/2 to on Brexit the day before polling - seemed a crazy price when 9/10 people I had spoken to in previous months were for Brexit. Lots of lovely free money for me

Same thing happened at the GE. I think a Tory majority was something daft like 8/1. The lesson to be learnt is that the polls and odds are pretty worthless when it comes to what way people will vote. You can't look at form or any historical hard data.

Indeed I got 13/2 as well, oddly the shop hadn't taken any bets on it at all, still I was happy enough to pop back in a few days and collect the money. I purely put the bet on as I'd decided for something so important I wasn't going to vote in a direction I wasn't confident of putting my money on, was pretty sure I'd lose it but was happy that my mind was made up, money was a nice little bonus while everyone in the office moaned at the result

[FN2TypeR]

Countdown said:

I stand to be corrected but don't the bookies base the odds in line with the way the bets are being placed? In other words they simply reflect how the best are being placed?

They don't suggest who is going to win/lose, their odds reflect who the betting public is going to win/lose.

Yep, it certainly plays a part - if you chuck ten million quid on Manchester United to win this weekend their odds thereafter will likely shorten drastically once the money comes in.

[scherzkeks]

Trump promises national health care after repeal of Obamacare (Romneycare ).

No surprise to anyone that looked beyond the media narrative, ofc. He ain't a modern conservative.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-16/trump-pro...

[anonymous-user]

scherzkeks said:

Trump promises national health Trumpcare after repeal of Obamacare (Romneycare ).

It's only a matter of time before the label sticks.

[jjlynn27]

Greg66 said:

scherzkeks said:

Trump promises national health Trumpcare after repeal of Obamacare (Romneycare ).

It's only a matter of time before the label sticks.

"It's gonna be great(care)!"

[Countdown]

scherzkeks said:

Trump promises national health care after repeal of Obamacare (Romneycare ).

No surprise to anyone that looked beyond the media narrative, ofc. He ain't a modern conservative.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-16/trump-pro...

The media didn't paint him as a Conservative. If anything the media painted him as somebody who will say anything to get elected.

However this does tend to explain why so many Republicans loathe him.

[minimoog]

scherzkeks said:

Trump promises national health care after repeal of Obamacare (Romneycare ).

No surprise to anyone that looked beyond the media narrative, ofc. He ain't a modern conservative.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-16/trump-pro...

Delightful comments from the Trumpettes below that srticle. Here are a couple of typical ones:

TypicalTrumplover1 said:

I don't give a damn about insurance, I just don't want to pay for anybody's medical needs but mine.....everybody carries thier own damn ball.

TypicalTrumplover2 said:

My Plan....YOU WANT IT, PAY FOR IT YOUR fkING SELF

[jmorgan]

^^^^^
Which is the bit that gets me. What will he have in place where the haves do not have to complain about the have nots?

[minimoog]

jjlynn27 said:

"It's gonna be great(care)!"

This is what he actually said:

Trump said:

It’ll be another plan. But they’ll be beautifully covered.

Beautifully covered.

[anonymous-user]

minimoog said:

jjlynn27 said:

"It's gonna be great(care)!"

This is what he actually said:

Trump said:

It’ll be another plan. But they’ll be beautifully covered.

Beautifully covered.

It's a beautiful thing.