EARLY VOTING Tallies Are Coming In - Here Are The State-by-State Results.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: shooterbrody

So a single betting site has more Republicans than Democrats. What is that supposed to prove?

I think it is more to do with the polls shifting. It's now just 204-199 in Democrat favour with 32 toss ups. Keep in mind that 29 of those toss ups are Republican held. The task for the Dems is to win the 204 they are expected to and then take 14 of the 32 toss ups (say the three they hold plus flip 11 of the remaining 29). That's a lot of flips.

I still see the Senate being Republican and the House being Communist, but it's far less of a sure thing than it was a month ago.

a reply to: soberbacchus

As of Sunday, the odds of the GOP keeping the House are at -140. That means you would need to bet $140 on the Republicans to win $100 if they stay in the majority. The Democrats are at +110, meaning a $100 bet would win you $110 if the Democrats manage to wrest control of the House.

it means the people actually taking bets on the election believe the gop will keep the house

by all means show the courage of your convictions

originally posted by: Gazrok
Still with the polls! LOL....

Lovely of you to decide that even with GOP holding the WH, Senate and House (for now) and being in complete control of economic policy, a downturn in the stock market is the Dems fault!

Kind of amazing really.

OK, then lets see what happens in the market on open Nov 7th, shall we? I just wish I knew which ones to pick!

Index fund with low management fees. Buy now and continue as the market falls.
The market is going to fall no matter what over the next twelve months. It might cough and spurt, but we are at peak and that means cyclical decline.

If you want your money sooner than later move to a money market.
If you can wait a few years to take profits, make the best of it every time the market drops or continues to drop and buy on the downslide and bottom.

Mostly the market turns in 10 year intervals. The Stimulus and slow and steady recovery bought us time this cycle, but the Trump sugar high ended that pace and we are overdue for a recession.

S&P 500 below with recessions in grey.

You don't need to be an economist to understand the pattern.

a reply to: soberbacchus

We'll just have to see who is right, and who is wrong on the 7th. The market has always been fear driven. To deny that.....

You don't need to be an economist to understand the pattern.

Agreed, but if you ARE one, it prevents you from realizing that patterns and historical trends, along with polls, mean exactly jack squat in today's political environment.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

As of Sunday, the odds of the GOP keeping the House are at -140. That means you would need to bet $140 on the Republicans to win $100 if they stay in the majority. The Democrats are at +110, meaning a $100 bet would win you $110 if the Democrats manage to wrest control of the House.

it means the people actually taking bets on the election believe the gop will keep the house

by all means show the courage of your convictions

???????????????

THAT ARTICLE LINKS HERE

mybookie.ag...

What are the odds again?

I'll wait for the lightbulb to go off, assuming you can do math.

THIS site has more legit history and betting odds
www.betfair.com...

originally posted by: Gazrok

As for governorships, I couldn't care less. I don't live in those states so if they want to elect corrupt dem governors, they can eat their hearts out and do so.

This is a fair point. I too, fail to see how governerships factor into it.

Red-state governor races could bring Medicaid expansion to millions
A blue wave might drive the biggest enrollment spike since Obamacare was first implemented.
www.politico.com...

a reply to: soberbacchus

As of Sunday

You dislike the story from USA Today, that is on you.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

As of Sunday

You dislike the story from USA Today, that is on you.

"like" has nothing to do with your mathematically false claim or your unwillingness to admit the same.

Red-state governor races could bring Medicaid expansion to millions
A blue wave might drive the biggest enrollment spike since Obamacare was first implemented.

That's pretty loose, and more of a regional thing vs. national (except as a trend). Especially since any new gov would need time to approve any such expansions. (and likely need the buy in of the state legislature)

Of course, I don't think the governor races are going to be immune to the red wave either.

You're not incorrect on the gambling bit though. It's only a slight edge the odds makers are giving to the GOP for the house. They are hedging their bets. While multiple outlets are reporting it, they all pretty much source the same.

a reply to: soberbacchus

oh please point out the "claim" I made?
I linked a USA today story. No more No less.

I bet the outcome is going to be interesting.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: projectvxn

Nation wide.

Wrong,

October 30th CALIFORNIA Update:

IMO, SMART Democrats in California who don't support the hurtful liberal agenda, but can't bring themselves to vote for a Republican, are wisely sitting this election out.

Source: sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...

originally posted by: Gazrok

Red-state governor races could bring Medicaid expansion to millions
A blue wave might drive the biggest enrollment spike since Obamacare was first implemented.

You're not incorrect on the gambling bit though. It's only a slight edge the odds makers are giving to the GOP for the house. They are hedging their bets. While multiple outlets are reporting it, they all pretty much source the same.

The USA Today article cited a gambling site where if you click through it is EVEN ODDS:
mybookie.ag...

The more reliable Betfair gives a significant edge to Dems:
www.betfair.com...

Neither give a "slight edge" or any edge at all to the GOP like you mistakenly assumed.

This is also Shooterbrody's confusion.

Despite me repeatedly providing the links nobody seems willing to acknowledge that factual reality, which is a larger issue in debating politics with Trump Supporters.

Check ANY betting site you like.

Odds favor Dems not GOP

www.vegasinsider.com...

* And as a bonus for Florida:
Nelson over Scott, 56% to 43%
Gillium over DeSantis 60% to 40%

Both close, but we will know in a week.

originally posted by: carewemust
October 30th CALIFORNIA Update:

IMO, SMART Democrats in California who don't support the hurtful liberal agenda, but can't bring themselves to vote for a Republican, are wisely sitting this election out.

Source: sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...

LORD...

Let me help you out here...EARLY VOTING showed Clinton Crushing in 2016.

Why Early Voting Was Overhyped
Don’t blame ‘the data’ when ad hoc analysis goes wrong.

Some statistical indicators are more useful than others. Data on early voting, for instance, usually doesn’t provide much predictive insight. Historically, the relationship between early voting in a state and the final voting totals there has been weak, and attempts to make inferences from early voting data have made fools of otherwise smart people.

...

On Oct. 23, for instance, The New York Times argued that because Clinton had banked votes in North Carolina and Florida, it might already be too late for Donald Trump to come back in those states:

...

In North Carolina, Clinton won the early vote by 2.5 percentage points, or about 78,000 votes. Furthermore, about two-thirds of votes were cast early. But Trump won the Election Day vote by almost 16 percentage points.

....

So there are multiple interpretations of the data, but there’s not much empirical guidance on which one works best … that makes for a recipe for confirmation bias.

fivethirtyeight.com...

a reply to: soberbacchus

Ahh nate pewter. As he'd tell you: an 80% chance doesn't mean what most think it does. It means if we ran this race 10 times the republicans would retain control twice, the dems would gain control 8. But we only run the election once. I won't be surprised if they (dems) win the house. I will be surprised if they have more than a 3-5 seat advantage. I also won't be surprised if republicans hold onto the house by a couple of seats.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Telling that you failed to provide a link or support.

I thought about it then figured it wouldn't matter what I posted. You'd find any source that said what you wanted it to say and claim it discredits my source. So why bother?

NOPE

Yep.

Pres. Obama was at 45% and at the peak of Obamacare Outrage

No, he was well below that. Low 40's most of the time. And that was with an adoring media that villified anyone who dared question what he did and glorified anything he did.

Trump is at 42% with a good economy.

Trump is at 44%. Obama was at 44%. All according to the RCP averages. Again, that was with trump getting 90% negative coverage and obama getting his a$$ licked by the media. Not to get off into the weeds, but since they're at similar levels of support, isn't it odd there wasn't a rash of conservative violence during obama like there is now with progressives and trump. Weird?

Not just Pres. Obama, but even Nixon and Carter had better approval ratings than Trump at this stage.

That doesn't mean much. They both had better approval rates than obama had at this stage too. Nixon won 49 states in re-election. He was a very popular president before watergate. Carter had a bump recovery to get back around the same level as obama and trump, in the summer before the election he was well under 40% approval.

But really, polls don't matter. The only poll that matters is one week from today and I guarantee you Trump will not preside over the historical shellacking of his party like obama did. Ergo, trump is far more popular than obama. By 10 miles.

a reply to: putnam6

Good resources and they provide some nuance to the numbers we see. Thanks.

a reply to: Sillyolme

this kind of crap doesnt add quality to our forum, it just provides a bad example for new comers to follow.. it just makes us look like idiots.


why do we and this site put up with your immature nonsense?

I can handle people who dont agree, thats fine.

but when you come here with 0 intent of adding to ATS and its awesomeness...you just become a bad name that people dont want to deal with.

your pink background and your name just make me want to ignore this website..

I mean really, add to the conversation or p1ss off...
add to the topic or dont post... it should be a rule.
why would any mature, reasonable adult waste their finite life posting on a forum with the sole purpose of annoying people? what kind of mental stability is happening there? its obvious you are a past user who got called out... take a hint!

this one line, nonsense replies just fill the board up with crap and its ugly.

When a Republican asks for your vote, tell them no but offer your thoughts and prayers..