Month: July 2019

In view of Nike’s recent example of what the word “cowardice” means, and Colin Clown-pernick’s opinion on the Betsy Ross flag, let’s go back to the Oval Office and listen in on the planning discussion for Barack Obama’s second inaugural ceremony in 2013 . . . Just for fun!
President Obama: “Let’s try to emphasize patriotism as a theme for this inauguration.”
Staff: “Do you have any ideas, sir?”
President Obama: “I want my speech at this year’s inauguration to mention our Founding Fathers, and the transition from 13 small colonies to the vast nation that we are today. Michelle has also drooped hints that I need to mention the names of more women in this speech, so make sure that Betsy Ross is mentioned at least a few times.”
Staff: “That’s a wonderful Idea, Mr. President. Just like with her school lunch program, Michelle seems to always have her finger on the pulse of the nation!”
President Obama: “We also are going to need some visual displays that will be captured by our friends at CNN and MSNBC, and will at the same time emphasize my patriotism. I took a lot of heat from Fox when I stopped wearing the flag pin on my lapel, so I want something that will be the opposite. Perhaps big American flags on display above my head.”
Staff: “Another stroke of genius, sir.”
President Obama: “I am visualizing five huge American flags high above my head with the flag in the center positioned directly me while I am speaking. And to tie everything together . . . Betsy Ross, the American flag, and my patriotism, how about having three present day flags in the center flanked by two Betsy Ross flags, one on each end.”
Staff: “Brilliant!”
President Obama:  “I figure with the 13 stars on her flag, it’s another way to tie together the growth from the 13 colonies to the present 50 states, err . . . it is 50, not 57, right?”
Staff: “Yes, 50 is correct, sir. And together with your speech, these flags will leave a wonderful and lasting impression!”
President Obama: “I think it’s really important to take into account the impression that kind of symbol would have for many of our fellow Americans.” (FYI, this exact line was possibly plagiarized by Beto O’Rourke just in the last few days!)
Staff: “Just to be on the safe side, is there anybody that could possibly be offended by this type of display?”
President Obama: “I do not think so. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) says that the flag is “innocuous” and has been used by people mostly for patriotic purposes. A senior research fellow for the group’s Center on Extremism, has told the Associated Press that the flag is most commonly used by people for patriotic purposes. (Again, FYI: Probably just by coincidence an opinion by the ADL and the statement by Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow for the group’s Center on Extremism were restated again in the last few days!)
Staff: “Okay then, Mr. President, we’ll go with it just as you have outlined.”

Now that you have read the inside poop on what happened in the Oval Office back in Jan. 2013, google “American flag display at Barack Obama’s 2013 inauguration” . . .  just for fun!

The other day I read an interesting article in the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal. Next to the first paragraph was a picture of a politician with blondish hair, dressed in a dark suit, talking with and giving the thumbs-up sign to an older gentleman. A line in the initial paragraph read as follows: A statesman once opined, “Never trust people who lead a one-dimensional political life. They are dull and dangerous.” Immediately an image of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi popped into my head. The gentleman about whom the article was written is obviously not dull and obviously not one-dimensional. The tip-off that this was not about Donald Trump was that in the accompanying picture his tie was not tied in a Windsor knot.

This particular article article was about Boris Johnson, who is the favorite to be the next leader of the British Conservative Party and the prime minister of the U.K. I do not pretend to be knowledgeable about the politics in the U.K., but many of the lines in the article referring to Mr. Johnson could easily have been written, referring to Mr. Trump.

-He has been married and divorced in the past, and the woman that he is living with is      considerably younger than him.

-Mr. Johnson is a bit eccentric and has an unusual hobby. (I assume that his Twitter    use could be considered an unusual hobby for Mr. Trump.)

– “Britain is in the grip of Boris Neurosis. It is a psychological condition much like the     Trump Derangement Syndrome that has about half of the populace in paroxysms of fear and loathing – the metropolitan, cultural, media and academic elites in     particular.”

– “Every hour of every day on the BBC and elsewhere in the main U.K.media someone      seems to be expressing revulsion at the personality of Mr. Johnson and his utter      unsuitability for high office.” (Substitute CNN and U.S. mainstream media for BBC     and main U.K media)

– Mr. Johnson’s wit and charisma are widely liked outside the BBC-Westminster    bubble. (Again substitute CNN/MSNBC-Washington bubble.)

To sum it up, it appears that Boris Johnson speaks the language of the people as does President Trump!

In many sports, you can find betting odds and point spreads. For example, the New England Patriots could be favored by 7 points over the Buffalo Bills, or the Patriots are 3:2 favorites over the Bills. There are no polls in the world of sport’s predicting. No one at  ESPN, ABC, or Fox is calling one thousand people to get their opinion on who is going to win the Patriots-Bills game.

In the world of politics it is the opposite. There are numerous polls just about every week on just about everything including the 2020 presidential election. The problem is that in the past polls have been sometimes unreliable and at times far from accurate for a variety of reasons, but this is all we have . . .  or is it? Is there a betting line or odds on the 2020 presidential election, and what is the difference between betting line odds and a poll?

The key difference between a betting market and a poll is this – a poll is a snapshot of voter intention at any given time, often including those who are undecided, with an average sample size in the thousands. A betting market is a global future prediction pool, updating in real time, factoring in the opinion of millions of individuals forecasting an event – backing up their opinion with their own cash. In the past, starting in 1868, betting on presidential elections was legal in the U.S. Back then the betting was done predominately by wealthy U.S. politicians and entertainers. How did they do? In 11 of 15 elections the betters were right, and in the 4 that they lost, they predicted a tight margin. However, betting on presidential elections has been illegal since the 1930s, so I guess we are left only with polls . . . or are we?

Although political betting is currently illegal in the U.S., it  is alive and well in other markets. In fact, US-Bookies.com predicted via press release on 6/25/19 that over $100 million will be spent in the 2020 race, “making it the biggest non-sports betting event of all time.”The website US-Bookies.com uses millions of betting dollars worldwide to provide market trends. It specializes in U.S. politics and who wagerers think will win at any given time. A spokesman for them said. “The money wagered on each candidate dictates the odds and therefore the percent chance, based on simple laws of supply and demand. In 2016, some election simulators and polls gave Trump under a 2% chance of success, while the betting market comfortably gave the president anywhere between a 25% and 40% chance of success.”

US-Bookies.com posts probabilities which are derived from “bet365”, a U.K. betting market. In the U.K. this type of betting is legal, regulated, and very large. The odds are converted to more user friendly percents. As of  6/29/19 Donald Trump a 43% chance of winning the 2020 presidential election. This is up from 31.5% on 6/27 and up from 27.5% on 6/1/19. Of the Democratic candidates as of 6/29/19 Biden is at 15.1%, Harris is at 11.3%, and Warren is at 10%. In a straight-up battle with Biden, Trump still enjoys 51.2 to 48.8 percent lead over the former Vice President.

Updated odds as of 7/2/19 (in Britain):

Trump = 45.2%

Harris = 12.9%

Biden = 11.3%

Warren = 9%

I may have to contact my friend in Liverpool and see if I can put some money on the favorite!