Ryan Glasspiegel
Videos by OutKick
It’s been about 1.5 months since we did presidential election gambling odds, but now is a good time to start revisiting them again. The conventions are in rear-view, and we’re now finally less than two months until Election Day. Here’s where the odds stand right now at books in the United Kingdom:
Joe Biden: 8/11
Donald Trump: 6/5
This means that Biden is still a slight favorite — you wager $11 to win $8 on Biden to win, and you wager $5 to win $6 on President Trump to be reelected. If you were looking at this like a money line gamble, Biden would be about -137 and President Trump would be about +120.
On July 21st, the last time we did this post, Biden was 8/15 (-187) and President Trump was 7/4 (+175). Thus, since that stretch, President Trump has gained considerable ground (though as we said he remains a slight underdog).
There’s been a lot of chatter on Nate Silver Twitter (and adjacent circles) wondering why it’s this close in the gambling odds when Biden appears to have an advantage in swing state polls. For example, this is what things looked like on Monday in Five Thirty Eight’s polling averages:
Biden’s lead per 538 polling averages:
-National 7.5%
-Wisconsin 7.3%
-Michigan 6.7%
-Arizona 4.6%
-Pennsylvania 4.5%
-Florida 2.8%
-North Carolina 1.8%— Conor Sen (@conorsen) September 7, 2020
Right now, FiveThirtyEight gives Biden a 72 percent chance to win the election with President Trump having a 28 percent chance.
I don’t necessarily have an answer for why the gambling odds diverge from these polls. There’s a theory out there, which I’ve talked about a number of times, that polls tend to underrate President Trump. Reasons for this range from that people don’t want to tell strangers they support him, or that they vote Trump or Republican on the belief it yields better economy and/or lower taxes, but also don’t want to say so out loud.
When I bring these theories up with people who follow this stuff closely, though, they say there’s no evidence that it’s the case, but that there’s evidence that turnout in big cities in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan was lower than expected in 2016 and that this hurt Hillary Clinton.
Anyways, if you believe that polls are fundamentally sound then there is great value on Biden, and if you believe they’re flawed then there is still some value in President Trump as an underdog.
We’ll keep you updated in the coming weeks if there are any dramatic changes in these gambling odds.
LOL fake news Biden ain’t leading any where anyone who believes he is deserves to lose their dough
OLITICS
Atlantic Editor Admits Story About Trump Disparaging Fallen Soldiers Could Be Wrong
BY RUSTY WEISS
SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 AT 12:11PM
Share Tweet Share Share Flip It Comment Email
Jeffrey Goldberg, Editor-in-Chief for The Atlantic, confessed that the central claim in his publication’s reprehensible hit piece on the President could very well be false.
The Atlantic column starts off with a claim that the President did not want to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, because “his hair would become disheveled in the rain” and that “he did not believe it important to honor American war dead.”
Remember – this is the lede to the piece and sets up every other argument throughout. That Trump despises the military and veterans, and referred to them as “suckers” and “losers.”
Goldberg admits that his four, off-the-record, anonymous sources may not have been correct and that the visit was indeed called off due to weather.
When presented with an excerpt from former national security adviser John Bolton’s book which details how the weather was the cause for cancellation of the visit to the cemetery, not a decision by POTUS over his hair, Goldberg conceded, “I’m sure all of those things are true.”