Originally Posted by Guest

Latest Quinnipiac poll shows Trump leading Hillary or even with her in three swing states.


FLORIDA: Trump 42 - Clinton 39
OHIO: Clinton 41 - Trump 41
PENNSYLVANIA: Trump 43 - Clinton 41

But the Q poll does not take the demographicals into account. In the three states mentioned, the demographicals fit into the Democratic mode.

The big cities of those states have large populations that have the people affected favorably by Democratic programs. These people do vote as a bloc. When they do that, the electoral votes go to their party.

Originally Posted by Guest

But the Q poll does not take the demographicals into account. In the three states mentioned, the demographicals fit into the Democratic mode.

The big cities of those states have large populations that have the people affected favorably by Democratic programs. These people do vote as a bloc. When they do that, the electoral votes go to their party.

OK, I got it. If the poll favors a Republican, it doesn't mean anything because of special circumstances, such as some fictitious demographics issue. But, if the poll favors the Democrats, it's probably very accurate. Is that what you are saying?

Originally Posted by Guest

OK, I got it. If the poll favors a Republican, it doesn't mean anything because of special circumstances, such as some fictitious demographics issue. But, if the poll favors the Democrats, it's probably very accurate. Is that what you are saying?

If you do not believe what I said, go to any of the election betting odds and see what they are doing for the odds of both candidates. Clinton is way ahead. These are the professional gamblers.

You know that the demographics are meaningful. You understand how big cities in the states decide where the electoral votes go.

No arguments intended. Just wait and see.

Originally Posted by Guest

But the Q poll does not take the demographicals into account. In the three states mentioned, the demographicals fit into the Democratic mode.

The big cities of those states have large populations that have the people affected favorably by Democratic programs. These people do vote as a bloc. When they do that, the electoral votes go to their party.

IF they vote. If someone is too lazy to seek a paying job, what makes you think they will wait in line to cast their vote? Too lazy to work, too lazy to vote.

Most minorities have finally come to realize that the Democrats have done NOTHING in the last eight years to improve the socioeconomic status of minorities. So, why would they continue to vote for them? They won't.

Originally Posted by Guest

If you do not believe what I said, go to any of the election betting odds and see what they are doing for the odds of both candidates. Clinton is way ahead. These are the professional gamblers.

You know that the demographics are meaningful. You understand how big cities in the states decide where the electoral votes go.

No arguments intended. Just wait and see.

With respect, I probably wouldn't put a lot of confidence in the professional gambler odds.
On the day of the brexit vote, the professional odds makers had remain at about 1/9 and leave at about 13/2.
Personally, I see a lot of parallels between Trump/Hillary and Brexit.

EU referendum odds - should you bet for Remain or Brexit? - Mirror Online

Originally Posted by Guest

With respect, I probably wouldn't put a lot of confidence in the professional gambler odds.
On the day of the brexit vote, the professional odds makers had remain at about 1/9 and leave at about 13/2.
Personally, I see a lot of parallels between Trump/Hillary and Brexit.

EU referendum odds - should you bet for Remain or Brexit? - Mirror Online

That's how you can make a lot of money. Why wouldn't you know more then the people in the gambling business? Bet on Tump.

It is amusing listening to folks portray odds makers as credible forecasters.

Why are they not rich?

Why are they not right more often?

Why are they so wrong so often?

They are in the category just below the local meteorlogist in the caliber, quality and accuracy of weather forecasting. MAybe that is not fair as there is some science to meterology!

Some folks will believe anything as long as it paints their picture the way they think it does.

Originally Posted by Guest

IF they vote. If someone is too lazy to seek a paying job, what makes you think they will wait in line to cast their vote? Too lazy to work, too lazy to vote.

Most minorities have finally come to realize that the Democrats have done NOTHING in the last eight years to improve the socioeconomic status of minorities. So, why would they continue to vote for them? They won't.

Going with what you said, the minorities KNOW that if a Democrat does not get elected, their "benefits" will be slashed by Republicans. They will turn out!

Originally Posted by Guest

It is amusing listening to folks portray odds makers as credible forecasters.

Why are they not rich?

Why are they not right more often?

Why are they so wrong so often?

They are in the category just below the local meteorlogist in the caliber, quality and accuracy of weather forecasting. MAybe that is not fair as there is some science to meterology!

Some folks will believe anything as long as it paints their picture the way they think it does.

Odds compilers set the odds at bookmaking firms. They are also known as traders, and their role is absolutely essential. The odds they set eventually determine how much in wagers a bookmaker is likely to take in, and how much money they are likely to make. The act of setting the odds for a sports event is known as pricing the market.

There are a number of aspects involved in pricing up markets for sports events. The primary goal is to make sure the odds accurately reflect how likely any particular outcome might be, while also ensuring that there's a built-in profit margin. Determining the likelihood of outcomes is largely based on statistics, but very often a certain amount of sports knowledge must be applied as well.

Compilers therefore have to be very knowledgeable about the sports for which they are pricing markets; thus, they often specialize in just one or two. They also have to have a solid understanding of various mathematical and statistical principles.

Let's look at how a compiler might price up a market for a tennis match in which Novak Djokovic is playing Andy Murray. These two players are very close in ability, so the compiler would have to take a number of factors into consideration. They would look at current form, for example, and each player's known ability on the relevant playing surface. They would also take the results of past meetings into account.

Based on all these factors, they might reach the conclusion that Djokovic has roughly a 60% chance of winning the match and Murray roughly a 40% chance. The odds that approximately reflect these chances are Djokovic at 1.67 and Murray at 2.50. These odds don't include any vig, which would also need to be considered.

Generally speaking, compilers have a target margin. This may vary quite significantly for any number of reasons, but let's assume in this case that the compiler wants around a 5% margin. They would reduce the odds for each player by 5%, giving 1.59 for Djokovic and 2.38 for Murray.

A bookmaker's margin can be calculated by adding the reciprocal of the odds for all possible outcomes and converting it to a percentage. In this case, there are two possible outcomes, and the following equation would be used.

Margin Example

As you can see, the compiler has achieved the target of a 5% margin. However, the job doesn't end there. Compilers also have to try and make sure that a bookmaker has a balanced book.

How the Bookmakers Make Money - What's the Secret

Long story short--they make a lot of money because it doesn't matter who wins. They take in enough money on both sides and charge a vig. For them it's not as childish as r's are better, no d's are better.

Originally Posted by Guest

Going with what you said, the minorities KNOW that if a Democrat does not get elected, their "benefits" will be slashed by Republicans. They will turn out!

Not to worry, when Donald Trump gets elected, you will still be able to abort your children and your collect welfare benefits.

Originally Posted by Guest

OK, I got it. If the poll favors a Republican, it doesn't mean anything because of special circumstances, such as some fictitious demographics issue. But, if the poll favors the Democrats, it's probably very accurate. Is that what you are saying?

Polls are BS, don't even look at them.

Originally Posted by Guest

If you do not believe what I said, go to any of the election betting odds and see what they are doing for the odds of both candidates. Clinton is way ahead. These are the professional gamblers.

You know that the demographics are meaningful. You understand how big cities in the states decide where the electoral votes go.

No arguments intended. Just wait and see.

They think the fix is in?

Originally Posted by Guest

IF they vote. If someone is too lazy to seek a paying job, what makes you think they will wait in line to cast their vote? Too lazy to work, too lazy to vote.

Most minorities have finally come to realize that the Democrats have done NOTHING in the last eight years to improve the socioeconomic status of minorities. So, why would they continue to vote for them? They won't.

Minorities, very soon, will be the majority. On that day, it won't matter, white people will lose.

Originally Posted by Guest

With respect, I probably wouldn't put a lot of confidence in the professional gambler odds.
On the day of the brexit vote, the professional odds makers had remain at about 1/9 and leave at about 13/2.
Personally, I see a lot of parallels between Trump/Hillary and Brexit.

EU referendum odds - should you bet for Remain or Brexit? - Mirror Online

Paper ballots and LOTS of teams counting to votes over there made it an honest vote.

We have "electronic" voting here...it can be fixed.

Originally Posted by Guest

It is amusing listening to folks portray odds makers as credible forecasters.

Why are they not rich?

Why are they not right more often?

Why are they so wrong so often?

They are in the category just below the local meteorlogist in the caliber, quality and accuracy of weather forecasting. MAybe that is not fair as there is some science to meterology!

Some folks will believe anything as long as it paints their picture the way they think it does.

Confirmation bias, it's REALLY hard to fight it.

Originally Posted by Guest

Odds compilers set the odds at bookmaking firms. They are also known as traders, and their role is absolutely essential. The odds they set eventually determine how much in wagers a bookmaker is likely to take in, and how much money they are likely to make. The act of setting the odds for a sports event is known as pricing the market.

There are a number of aspects involved in pricing up markets for sports events. The primary goal is to make sure the odds accurately reflect how likely any particular outcome might be, while also ensuring that there's a built-in profit margin. Determining the likelihood of outcomes is largely based on statistics, but very often a certain amount of sports knowledge must be applied as well.

Compilers therefore have to be very knowledgeable about the sports for which they are pricing markets; thus, they often specialize in just one or two. They also have to have a solid understanding of various mathematical and statistical principles.

Let's look at how a compiler might price up a market for a tennis match in which Novak Djokovic is playing Andy Murray. These two players are very close in ability, so the compiler would have to take a number of factors into consideration. They would look at current form, for example, and each player's known ability on the relevant playing surface. They would also take the results of past meetings into account.

Based on all these factors, they might reach the conclusion that Djokovic has roughly a 60% chance of winning the match and Murray roughly a 40% chance. The odds that approximately reflect these chances are Djokovic at 1.67 and Murray at 2.50. These odds don't include any vig, which would also need to be considered.

Generally speaking, compilers have a target margin. This may vary quite significantly for any number of reasons, but let's assume in this case that the compiler wants around a 5% margin. They would reduce the odds for each player by 5%, giving 1.59 for Djokovic and 2.38 for Murray.

A bookmaker's margin can be calculated by adding the reciprocal of the odds for all possible outcomes and converting it to a percentage. In this case, there are two possible outcomes, and the following equation would be used.

Margin Example

As you can see, the compiler has achieved the target of a 5% margin. However, the job doesn't end there. Compilers also have to try and make sure that a bookmaker has a balanced book.

How the Bookmakers Make Money - What's the Secret

Long story short--they make a lot of money because it doesn't matter who wins. They take in enough money on both sides and charge a vig. For them it's not as childish as r's are better, no d's are better.

Yes, like stock brokerages, they take a cut on each trade.

Originally Posted by Guest

Not to worry, when Donald Trump gets elected, you will still be able to abort your children and your collect welfare benefits.

And moms will still be able to dump off their kids where Lawanda, the 3rd worlder from Somalia will be "teaching" you child.

Partisan BS bait thread......again!

Originally Posted by Guest

The call was to discuss their grandchildren.
This Democratic "logic" is why Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reed, Charlie Rangle, and Barack, the converted Muslim that suddenly becomes Christian, get elected.

Stop being a jerk. The president in not muslim, *******.

Originally Posted by Guest

Stop being a jerk. The president in not muslim, *******.

Of course not. He is a Muslim sympathizer/enabler. It's the gun's fault, the truck's fault, or the lack of sympathy by the white Cops.

But, any way you look at it, he is a low life anti-American ****.

Originally Posted by Guest

Of course not. He is a Muslim sympathizer/enabler. It's the gun's fault, the truck's fault, or the lack of sympathy by the white Cops.

Who cares if the cops are white or black? Most cops were bullies as kids and just matured into jobs where they could bully legally - until camera phones were invented.

Now, some are being caught doing their illegal bullying and the tables have turned!

I urge everyone to have their camera phone ready at all times and to turn it on if you are ever pulled over.