Wagering on Obama's re-election

Some wagering discussion re: Obama’s re-election got started in a GD thread, so I thought I would continue it here, and propose some action of my own.

I bet that Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. I am willing to take up to $1000 of action on this bet (meaning I am willing to lose up to $1000). And I want 15 to 1 on my bet (meaning that if you want to be paid $10 if you win, then you must pay me $150 if I win).

The winning condition for you is that Obama is sworn in as President for his second term in office in the presidential term that immediately follows the present term. If that happens, you win. If that doesn’t happen for any reason whatsoever, then I win.

I may be willing to take more than $1000 of action if I get better odds.

15:1? Wow, if you think the odds against the Republicans are that bad, they must be in worse shape than I ever thought.

Your odds are self-serving bullshit, and so are your conditions since you would win if Obama were to die or become incapacitated in his first term.

You need to drop that condition and even up the odds, otherwise your action just isn’t worth anyone else’s while.

Here is the most current line I could find on this:

I don’t gamble much, but I’d probably take at least 100 worth of action at 15:1 that Obama won’t be re-elected.

If I were dumb enough to take a sucker bet (in terms of odds) for* Obama then I’d want some clause on what happens if he decides not to run or if something untoward happens. A lot of nutjobs out there, you know, sipping tea and wearing funny hats.

*ETA: meant the same bet as the OP is offering with a nice return.

If a Republican is elected President in 2012, I will undoubtedly be looking for ways to assuage my disappointment. Paying you $15,000 is not likely to help in that regard.

Dio, when you walk into a store and see a price tag on an item, do you regard that price as “self-serving bullshit”?

Oh wait, you probably do.

In any event, I inhabit a world where people can discuss things and can agree on the terms at which they will exchange goods and services. I guess such a thing just never occurred to you.

I don’t think you’re going to get many people to give you action on those odds. I think you need to lower them some if you want takers.

I’m listening if anyone wants to discuss.

Yeah, but you scare people away with stupid-bad odds like that. If people hear 5:1 they might negotiate to 2:1, but when I hear 15:1 I assume you are not serious and are just jerking people around to make some sort of point.

Meh. Lots of people in the GD thread are predicting a second term for Obama. I wanted to give them an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is. Also, I’d be taking substantial payment risk, so if I did get $1000 action at 15 to 1, I’d probably be lucky to actually collect more than $1000.

How’s that? I’m not really familiar with gambling, but if you make a $1000 bet at 15-to-1 odds and win, do you not receive 15 times your bet? Or are you suggesting that the losers will renege?

Yea, but everyone else it taking the same payment risk.

I think Obama will win, but I certainly think there’s a much greater then 7% chance he’ll loose. Hell, historically he has an 8% chance of being assasinated in office!

You’re not going to find anyone dumb enough to take this bet.

I think there’s a solid chance that others will not pay me.

In any event, if anyone wants to bet, propose some terms and we can talk.

It depends on the price tag, doesn’t it? Are you saying there is no such thing as price gouging? All prices are fair?

Oh, wait, you probably do.
Your action is not worth anyone’s while. You are asking them to risk substantially more than anything they stand to gain, while simultaneously capping yourself. Your odds are a ripoff, a sucker bet, not because anyone is particularly scared that Obama will lose, but because your proffered returns are so paltry. We can get substantially better lines elsewhere. Why would we waste anytime with your amateur bullshit?

Not only that, but you want to claim victory and collect money if something untoward happens to Obama, which is not only unsavory and unsporting, but belies your claim that you’re trying to make rhetorical point about confidence in Obama’s re-election.

Dio, you don’t like the price I’m offering for what I am selling. Either (i) make a counter-offer or (ii) move along.

That’s not even a sucker bet, that’s just insulting. Especially with the suggestion that the takers aren’t going to pay up.

ETA: I’m not going to take the bet, but I’d say 5 to 1 - with a get out clause for death and similar circumstances - might get you a few takers.

I’d be willing to take this bet but not at the OP’s sucker bet odds.

Me, too; and I live in a world in which when someone offers ridiculous terms, other people can make fun of them for it. I guess such a thing just never occurred to you.

I guessed right!

Tell you what, Rand Rover: I’ll give 1000 to 1 odds that the Sun will rise tomorrow (relative to the reference frame of the Earth, of course). If it does, you pay me $10, and if it doesn’t, I’ll pay you $10,000. Deal?

I think it’s fairly telling that Rand Rover is only willing to bet on Obama’s loss if the odds are sufficiently in his favor.

You seem so certain that Obama’s going to lose- so why are you so afraid to offer fair odds?