trump for president good/bad for ireland

Purple said:
The man couldn't make a decision to save his life. Lovely guy though!
Click to expand...

Hi Purple,

If you get a chance, can you elaborate please? (Anytime, I've seen Carter interviewed over the last 20 years, I have been hugely impressed by his values and intelligence. I'm a little young to remember his presidency and I have not studied it - so I am interested in understanding what key specific decisions he dithered on.)
 

I'd forgotten about Charvey Shirts. An also our deaf and largely blind president in the 60's , and the 2 intercounty hurlers, one who might have been a wee bit too fond of the drop. Now we have a teacher so maybe no surprise the Dail has long holidays
 
Less than a week to go and its neck and neck.

Paddy power have Clinton at 1/3 and Trump at 5/2. As I understand it that means they think her 7.5 times more likely to win. If we assume that either one or the other must win, that means that the bookies are taking 16 and 2/3 % for themselves. In my own opinion it is much closer than that, but unless Trump is decisively defeated, this is a bad election for us all.

The reality of this campaign is that the US political system is simply not interested in dealing with the world as it really is. Trump's, "build a wall" nonsense and Clinton's reneging on her belief in free trade. These are responses to perceptions not to reality.
 
thedaddyman said:
The only elected US Presidents who seem to have controlled themselves in terms of the bedroom before Obama were Carter,and Nixon and it's not like they will go down as all time greats..
Click to expand...
I don't know about Carter but by any definition Richard Milhous Nixon was a great president. Richard Nixon, a president of Irish descent, inter alia, ended the Vietnam war; ended the draft; established relations with communist China; signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the USSR; enforced desegregation in US schools; created a Presidential Task Force on Women's Rights, established the Environmental Protection Agency, set up the Family Assistance Plan to make direct cash payments to needy families including single parents; visited Timahoe in 1970; etc. etc. etc. By any standard, not a bad record.

Gerry Canning said:
But wasn,t Nixon caught snooping @ Watergate.
Click to expand...

President Nixon was never charged with ordering the Watergate break-in. Subsequently he resigned when a tape recording disclosed he had discussed using the CIA to frustrate an FBI investigation into Watergate, actions he had previously denied.
 
cremeegg Clinton 1/3 means she is 3 times more likely to win than The Donald. The Donald's odds are 7.5 times Clinton's but that's not the same thing. Also 1/3 And 5/2 is a 3% mark up for bookies.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
cremeegg Clinton 1/3 means she is 3 times more likely to win than The Donald.
Click to expand...

But his odds to loose are not the reverse, not even close, enough to allow for other outcomes and profit.

Duke of Marmalade said:
The Donald's odds are 7.5 times Clinton's but that's not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Can you explain


Duke of Marmalade said:
Also 1/3 And 5/2 is a 3% mark up for bookies.
Click to expand...
How do you calculate that. I got 16.67% from 3/1 her odds to LOOSE minus 2.5 his odds to WIN = 0.5 over 3. Which leaves 16.67% for the house.
 
cremeegg

Lesson on my favourite subject.

Clinton 1/3 means 75% chance (ignoring bookies commission)
Trump 5/2 means 28% chance (2/7)
Together that is 103% all round i.e. a 3% mark up for the book
Put another way, let's say the book is perfectly balanced, that is no matter who wins the bookie pays out 100. That means she has taken 28 in bets on Trump and 75 on Clinton, 103 in all and so a profit of 3 on her turnover.

Now let's say the bookies have it right. Then stripping out the commission we would have Clinton's chance of a win at 73% and Trump's at 27%, that is a ratio of 2.7 to 1, which is reasonably close to 3/1.

Betfair has negligible mark up (it makes its profits from charging explicit commission). As I write Betfair
rate the chances at precisely 75/25.

I'm going to stick my neck out. I think Clinton is a shoe in. Betting folk have been rattled by Brexit which bucked the odds and the polls but it won't happen this time. Trump has alienated too many constituencies. A good hedge bet is 100 Clinton to win Florida at 1/1 and 50 Trump to win overall at 3/1. If either happens 200 return for 150 outlay. I think the chances of neither are slim. If Clinton loses Florida I think she loses the lot.
 

this is the same Nixon who expanded the war into Laos and Cambodia having already interfered in the Paris peace negotiations in 68 to aid his election campaign thus possibly lengthening the war. The same Nixon who had to pay almost half a million dollars in back taxes a few months before he resigned. As for Watergate, he may not have been convicted or even charged but it's naïve to think that he wasn't aware of it
 
cremegg just to explain further your erroneous argument. You will see that the bookie only wins .5 if Clinton loses. If Clinton wins the bookie pays 1 on the winning Clinton bet but pockets 1 on the losing Trump bet, breaks even. So the .5 only arises if Trump wins, a 25% chance. So on your calculations that's a 25% chance of making 16% that is 4% expected profit. Not quite technically correct but close to the correct answer of 3%.
 
thedaddyman said:
The same Nixon who had to pay almost half a million dollars in back taxes a few months before he resigned.
Click to expand...

Correct. But this has nothing to do with his achievements as a great president. But more germane to the subject of this thread, unlike Mr Trump, President Nixon made a public disclosure of this tax affairs, even while subject to audit, something Mr Trump has refused to do.
 
I'm with PMU on Nixon. He did great work towards ending the Cold War. Remember it was Kennedy who started the war, changing low level involvement into a major war. Nixon probably wouldn't have made such a balls up of the Cuban missile crisis either where the USA ended up having to withdraw their ballistic missiles from Turkey.
Nixon wasn't a good man but he was a good president.
 
In terms of ranking US presidents, Wikipedia has a lot of data, examining the question from multiple angles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

By any fair reading of this data, the view that by "any definition Richard Milhous Nixon was a great president" is a seriously minority one.

The data also shows the blunt statement that "Carter was an appallingly bad President" as complete nonsense!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the lesson, I am still pondering it, so far I see that it accepts that the bookies odds are the true odds.


Duke of Marmalade said:
I'm going to stick my neck out. I think Clinton is a shoe in.
Click to expand...

Fair play for for that prediction. Not to leave you hanging, I predict that Trump will win. He will turn out less educated white voters in greater numbers than expected, people who don't usually vote. This will give him Ohio, Pennsylvania, cuban americans will not vote for Hillary this may give him Florida, He may also get some of the upper Midwest states that are usually working class Democrat. Against that Hilary has no energised base, non cuban Hispanics maybe, that might give her Arizona but not enough. That leaves North Carolina, will Black turnout, be high enough for Hilary to win, I think Trump will do it.

While I have always thought that Hilary might make an excellent President, she is simply competent, I must say that Trump would make a more interesting President, who knows what he might do. And if a racist, misogynist bully is what America wants, then let them have one.


That seems like profitable advice
 
Well yes the analysis is based on the assumption that after adjusting for commission the bookies have it right. What does right mean? We will only know the truly right answer tomorrow. By right I mean the best estimate of the current chances given all known data and money is usually the most honest leveller in providing that estimate.

I see Trump is currently 4/1 on Betfair. I expected him to go out when the polls opened and exit polls became available but that hasn't happened so it is closer than I expected.

What we are seeing is the rise of the "deplorable" in Western democracies. Deplorables won Brexit and are threatening in several European countries.

If Trump had cornered the deplorable vote I would agree with you but he has really only secured the white male deplorables. Probably not a majority of white female deplorables and scarcely any Black or Hispanic deplorables.

Continuation of lesson: cremegg I think you are confusing odds and probabilities (aka chances). The odds against a 6 on a single roll of a die is 5/1 whilst the odds of an odd number is 1/1. But the chances are in the ratio of 3 (odd numbers) to 1 (six).
 
Last edited:
Oh dear God America, what have you done! Looks like most of the experts on here got it as badly wrong as the bookies. Can polls ever be trusted any more?
 
Very good calls. I trust you snapped up some of that 5/1 that was going
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register