0
$ £
auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
30 September 2016 - 1:22am

Hillary vs Trump ... FIGHT!

54 replies • Last post

With the U.S. election getter nearer and the big debates happening I'm really interested to hear what everyone, especially you folks in the USA, think about the upcoming election. Are you behind one of the candidates, or are you disappointed at the choice on offer?

Hillary, Trump caricatures

Obviously I'm not American but if I was I think I'd be firmly in that second camp. On the one hand I think Trump is a dangerous nutcase, but on the other hand can't there be some alternative to the guys who have already been in power already? I have a scary thought that future elections will be fought out between the Clinton, Bush and Trump families forevermore...

1 member gave thanks for this useful post: sharpe

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

usbarbadosslim93 Recently online: 52 min ago
Forum Angel
barbadosslim93's picture
Location: Michigan
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Posts: 8333
Thanks given: 540
Thanks received: 567
30 September 2016 - 9:32am
#1

I was on a flight and caught the debate in the air. The one thing that's really crazy is that THIS is who we decided to lead our country. One guy is an incompetent nutcase, and the other is completely untrustworthy and likely corrupt.

I am of the strong belief we need a third party system, as there's no real GOOD choice that has a realistic shot at winning.

My gut tells me to vote for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian party, but even I have to admit part of me is saying that I should vote for Clinton in order to keep that nutcase out of power.

caactmyname
GamblerGambler
actmyname's picture
Joined: 13 Aug 2016
Posts: 82
Thanks given: 7
Thanks received: 24
30 September 2016 - 11:19pm
#2
barbadosslim93 wrote:

I was on a flight and caught the debate in the air. The one thing that's really crazy is that THIS is who we decided to lead our country. One guy is an incompetent nutcase, and the other is completely untrustworthy and likely corrupt.

I am of the strong belief we need a third party system, as there's no real GOOD choice that has a realistic shot at winning.

My gut tells me to vote for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian party, but even I have to admit part of me is saying that I should vote for Clinton in order to keep that nutcase out of power.

That's the problem with the American voting system, really. Minus the electoral college, there's the FPTP system in which the candidate with the most votes gets the presidency. It forces voters to "vote smart" instead of vote for who they want. If there are two main candidates leaving all others in the dust, you're essentially forced to vote for whomever you decide is better.

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
30 September 2016 - 11:54pm
#3

Thats very interesting actmyname. I didn't know that Americans don't do preferential voting. Yeah that really encourages you to vote for only the ones that have a realistic shot at winning otherwise the vote is more or less wasted.

The way things work here is that we have to number in order the candidates in our local electorate. If your first preference is eliminated, your vote goes to your second preference and so on. Nothing is perfect of course... that system has a whole lot of its own problems though. In recent times we have had people elected who get hardly any first preference votes but have engineered their way in via complex preference trading deals with other single issue fringe lunatics.

Also the major difference is that despite popular misconception (even here) we don't even get to vote on who the Prime Minister is. The parties just pick a leader and if they win that person gets the job. The only people who get to vote for or against the leader are the ones that live in their electorate.

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

caactmyname
GamblerGambler
actmyname's picture
Joined: 13 Aug 2016
Posts: 82
Thanks given: 7
Thanks received: 24
1 October 2016 - 1:45pm
#4
CL-Ed wrote:

Thats very interesting actmyname. I didn't know that Americans don't do preferential voting. Yeah that really encourages you to vote for only the ones that have a realistic shot at winning otherwise the vote is more or less wasted.

The way things work here is that we have to number in order the candidates in our local electorate. If your first preference is eliminated, your vote goes to your second preference and so on. Nothing is perfect of course... that system has a whole lot of its own problems though. In recent times we have had people elected who get hardly any first preference votes but have engineered their way in via complex preference trading deals with other single issue fringe lunatics.

Also the major difference is that despite popular misconception (even here) we don't even get to vote on who the Prime Minister is. The parties just pick a leader and if they win that person gets the job. The only people who get to vote for or against the leader are the ones that live in their electorate.

It gets worse. Now, the electoral college can make it such that a candidate with ~25% of the popular vote can win the presidential election, with the electoral vote.

How it works:

All the states are given "electoral votes" in which there are 538 total electoral votes - corresponding to 438 electors and 100 senators.

The states' number of votes are dependent on the population they have, but all states, no matter how small, must have a minimum of 3 votes. But, the problem with this method is that a campaign can focus on only a few states... and win.

Here's a video talking about it more in-depth. It's a sickening system.

usbarbadosslim93 Recently online: 52 min ago
Forum Angel
barbadosslim93's picture
Location: Michigan
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Posts: 8333
Thanks given: 540
Thanks received: 567
2 October 2016 - 3:14am
#5

I believe the original idea of the Electoral College was to give smaller states a say in the election, but that was when the country was first being founded, and American expansion hadn't yet reached it's peak.

The system we have sucks, and it's awful that there's only two real choices, both of which are largely controlled by the same large interests.

I wish there was an easy solution for this, but I really can't see it ever being morphed into something different without some huge upheaval of the government... which also isn't realistic.

My son asked me a few weeks ago if I liked Hillary or Trump, and I said neither. He asked why and I in turn asked: "Would you rather someone punch you in the face, or punch you in the stomach?"

His response: "Neither of those sounds good. I don't want either."

"Exactly."

caactmyname
GamblerGambler
actmyname's picture
Joined: 13 Aug 2016
Posts: 82
Thanks given: 7
Thanks received: 24
2 October 2016 - 4:23am
#6
barbadosslim93 wrote:

I believe the original idea of the Electoral College was to give smaller states a say in the election, but that was when the country was first being founded, and American expansion hadn't yet reached it's peak.

The system we have sucks, and it's awful that there's only two real choices, both of which are largely controlled by the same large interests.

I wish there was an easy solution for this, but I really can't see it ever being morphed into something different without some huge upheaval of the government... which also isn't realistic.

My son asked me a few weeks ago if I liked Hillary or Trump, and I said neither. He asked why and I in turn asked: "Would you rather someone punch you in the face, or punch you in the stomach?"

His response: "Neither of those sounds good. I don't want either."

"Exactly."

Actually, in the video, it's said that most of the attention is only to the same states for most campaigns - little to no attention is given to the smaller states, actually. It showcased that the northwest states were given almost no attention (and California and Texas, because their votes count for less)

"Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia received a majority of the candidates' attention during the election."

That's 18 + 29 + 20 + 13 = 80 votes! Getting the popular vote in just 4 states give you 14.9% of the electoral vote!

Keep in mind, too, that there are multiple candidates too. You only need to focus on states that would support you - hence why Trump has a strong fighting chance, even if more than 2/3 of the country doesn't support him! (Picking a demographic that supports you may allow you to garner support in states where you can seek to gain lots of electoral votes with less effort)

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
2 October 2016 - 11:26pm
#7

That actually sounds very similar to how things work here too. The elections focus on what are called the "marginal electorates" - i.e. the ones where both major sides have a chance of winning with just a few percent change of votes either way. Guess where all the promises are aimed at and where the money gets spent?

There were some interesting revelations over the weekend about Trump's business failures and exposure of his tax bills. Apparently he's a "genius" for not paying any tax. I'm sure people without decent medical care or on food stamps might think of some other words to describe him though.

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
3 October 2016 - 11:09pm
#8

Never been too tempted by the politic and in fact never voted in my life, this is really dirty job for me and don't recognise many politicians worldwide at which to sympathize in fact.
The US elections always had been a global event though and it's in the news all over the world so after that anti politics monologue I've made Smile my question is in fact... who is going to win it? Any thoughts and predictions from you guys?
By the way don't want to meet any of those( from the picture above, in a dark street at night Scared )

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
4 October 2016 - 4:51am
#9

I'm with you all the way in the dislike of most politicians sharpe. And I'm certainly not fond of either of these two, but the poor Americans are stuck with picking the lesser of two evils. Its the old South Park school elections episode again.

As for who is likely to win, these are the current odds at Betfair:

Clinton 1.36 (= 73.5%)
Trump 3.85 (= 26%)

So Hillary is the clear favourite at this stage.

1 member gave thanks for this useful post: sharpe

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

usbarbadosslim93 Recently online: 52 min ago
Forum Angel
barbadosslim93's picture
Location: Michigan
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Posts: 8333
Thanks given: 540
Thanks received: 567
4 October 2016 - 1:03pm
#10

Yeah, Hillary for sure has the edge, and the way the Electoral College is, she has a huge edge when you consider how large California is.

The one thing that could throw things off is that many Trump supporters may not be voicing their support in the polls, as there's almost a stigma attached to supporting him, making people's support more clandestine. This was certainly the case in Michigan, where Bernie supporters didn't reflect in the polls, and he pulled off a major upset of Clinton in the primary. I'd be interested to see if that plays out in some of the swing states that are already polling as a toss-up.

1 member gave thanks for this useful post: sharpe

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
4 October 2016 - 11:28pm
#11
CL-Ed wrote:

As for who is likely to win, these are the current odds at Betfair:

Clinton 1.36 (= 73.5%)
Trump 3.85 (= 26%)

So Hillary is the clear favourite at this stage.

The way my sports betting going at the moment I'd might try a bet there, for Hillary I mean, without knowing any numbers state by state just at first sight I just tough it would be more tighter than the odds shows, at least from what I've remember it's always been quite tight contests in the end.

usbarbadosslim93 Recently online: 52 min ago
Forum Angel
barbadosslim93's picture
Location: Michigan
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Posts: 8333
Thanks given: 540
Thanks received: 567
5 October 2016 - 1:13pm
#12

I watched this episode of GameOverGreggy last night, and it has some interesting takes on the debate, and one of the hosts, Colin, studied political science and gives some facts that might make you realize how close this election will be.

One thing I found very interesting is the claim that elections always tighten in the last week before voting. That's concerning, as this election is already very tight, and makes things even more of a tossup. It'll be a very interesting month...

2 members gave thanks for this useful post: sharpe, Simon_whistler

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
6 October 2016 - 5:38am
#13

I wonder why the odds are so far apart if the election is so tight? Obviously the money doesn't agree with that, but then again we all know what happened with the Brexit vote in the UK after the odds had predicted a comfortable win by the no voters.

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
6 October 2016 - 10:30pm
#14

I think bookmakers trying been too careful here, they lower the odds for the favourite and increase that of the underdog because either they expecting many stakes on Hillary or many stakes for her all ready have been placed so that automatically reduce the value of her odds despite the chance for Clinton's victory remains the same.
Or they just know something that we don't Wink

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
7 October 2016 - 12:22am
#15

True, the story with Brexit was that there were a lot more individual bets on the yes vote, but for smaller stakes. The large punters had their money on the no vote so that skewed the betting odds away from the real chances. I guess its possible that the same is happening here. I hope not!

1 member gave thanks for this useful post: sharpe

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
7 October 2016 - 11:11pm
#16

I guess a Trump bet would be a good idea if there's a cash out option available, in the last days before the elections or maybe even in the election day itself the odds for both candidates will be a lot closer I guess which could earn you a profit even before the elections started but I don't know if they would offer cash outs option for such bet.

caactmyname
GamblerGambler
actmyname's picture
Joined: 13 Aug 2016
Posts: 82
Thanks given: 7
Thanks received: 24
8 October 2016 - 1:09am
#17
sharpe wrote:

I guess a Trump bet would be a good idea if there's a cash out option available, in the last days before the elections or maybe even in the election day itself the odds for both candidates will be a lot closer I guess which could earn you a profit even before the elections started but I don't know if they would offer cash outs option for such bet.

Maybe bet and hope to hedge if Hillary odds decline?

I would do that, but I don't have total faith in the odds... that's just me.

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
8 October 2016 - 1:42pm
#18
actmyname wrote:

Maybe bet and hope to hedge if Hillary odds decline?

I would do that, but I don't have total faith in the odds... that's just me.

Yes of course there's always a risk but could be a good chance this, in some point Hillary odds could decline because great number of people will bet on her I guess, but the odds for her are al ready low enough, did you meant to bet on Hillary's victory anyway?

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
9 October 2016 - 11:09pm
#19

Anyone still want to bet on him after his admission of being a serial crotch grabber? The odds are now:

Hillary 1.23 (81.3%)
Trump 5.46 (18.3%)

I think you might be better off betting on whoever you think might take over from him if he gets dumped before the election!

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

auCL - klaw
StaffStaff
CL - klaw's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 3 Mar 2014
Posts: 996
Thanks given: 1709
Thanks received: 150
10 October 2016 - 1:11am
#20

I don't know.....Trump has exposed himself and been exposed as a failed business man who happily cheats his vendors and suppliers out of what is legitimately theirs, a smug tax dodger, sleezebag, misogynist, racist, childish idiot who is clearly incapable of any diplomacy. Yet has secured the top spot for the Republicans and still remains so despite it all.

Too many experts who are using logic to make these calls have been proven wrong time and time again and I'm am truly scared that this maniac could become president of the US. So despite this massive pile of evidence that he's a spoilt white rich man who cares about little but himself, his 'up yours' messages that he espouses appeals to the anger and emotion that many people are feeling and they aren't interested in anything else apparently. I really don't think those odds reflect what could happen in these elections.

2 members gave thanks for this useful post: CL-Ed, coolsongss

krcoolsongss
Gold PlayerGold Player
Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Posts: 719
Thanks given: 493
Thanks received: 351
10 October 2016 - 9:40am
#21

Hey guys, what do you think about the 2nd debate? I just check on the news here, but, it seems that there were not debates enough upon policies, but mostly criticism on each other.

caactmyname
GamblerGambler
actmyname's picture
Joined: 13 Aug 2016
Posts: 82
Thanks given: 7
Thanks received: 24
10 October 2016 - 1:52pm
#22
coolsongss wrote:

Hey guys, what do you think about the 2nd debate? I just check on the news here, but, it seems that there were not debates enough upon policies, but mostly criticism on each other.

Absolutely. It was just riddled with ad hominem everywhere, question dodging, and strawman arguments from both sides.

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
10 October 2016 - 9:51pm
#23

It sounds very childish all round.

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
19 October 2016 - 5:31am
#24

I read today that the American Psychological Association is saying that 52% of Americans that they recently surveyed have said this this election campaign is a significant source of stress.
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2016/10/presidential-election-str...

I hope we're not contributing to the stress with this thread!

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

auIndependentGambler
Low RollerLow Roller
IndependentGambler's picture
Joined: 13 Oct 2016
Posts: 23
Thanks given: 0
Thanks received: 4
19 October 2016 - 6:39am
#25

I am not an american, But I feel stressed. I watched the debates and I'm normally not interested in politics.
The unknown of what could happen if trump gets into power is really scary.

1 member gave thanks for this useful post: CL - klaw

ustwitchyseal
Low RollerLow Roller
twitchyseal's picture
Joined: 23 Jun 2016
Posts: 31
Thanks given: 3
Thanks received: 16
20 October 2016 - 1:39am
#26

Is this real life?

200w.gif
auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 6540
Thanks given: 2744
Thanks received: 2085
20 October 2016 - 5:46am
#27
IndependentGambler wrote:

I am not an american, But I feel stressed. I watched the debates and I'm normally not interested in politics.
The unknown of what could happen if trump gets into power is really scary.

Ha you're braver than me! I think I'd rather look at the sun through a magnifying glass than watch those two debate.

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing.
Every comment you make in our forum earns you CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop!

usbarbadosslim93 Recently online: 52 min ago
Forum Angel
barbadosslim93's picture
Location: Michigan
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Posts: 8333
Thanks given: 540
Thanks received: 567
20 October 2016 - 12:57pm
#28

I have friends that are so enthralled in these debates, it's crazy. I watched the first one on a plane, but really watching the other two when I had proper choice of entertainment was too much.

I'm just ready for this to be over.

lvblck
True PlayerTrue Player
Location: The North
Joined: 6 Apr 2016
Posts: 823
Thanks given: 77
Thanks received: 204
21 October 2016 - 1:22am
#29

I was always for Hillary Clinton for many reasons- equality, LGBT rights, female rights and animal rights too (as Trump really likes hunting). Yesterday I saw the debate and I mean, the man is completely delusional.

bgsharpe
Jackpot ChaserJackpot Chaser
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 2315
Thanks given: 559
Thanks received: 180
21 October 2016 - 10:17pm
#30

Did anyone get the winnings from Paddy Power already? Joking

I wasn't able to place a bet here, Betfair didn't offer that stake, it's a shame Thumb Down

Post new comment

Have something to say? Agree or disagree? Tell us what you think!

Login using your social network account
Or log in with a Casino Listings account

Login or register to post comments

Registering for an account takes less than a minute and you will be brought right back here to comment afterwards.

Share this