What odds do you want?
No thanks.
Good thing that the Republican party is defeated and in deep decline with a ageing party based of racists and corporate fat cat.
If not, you’d think 15-1 odds were not that bad.
I’d have accepted 5-1 on McCain/Obama.
I’ll make this wager with you for evens if you like.
Ooops, no I won’t, got things the wrong way around.
I’ll back Obama, 2-1 in my favour.
No thanks. I need some compensation for the fact that he’s a sitting president who was extremely popular at one time.
I’m not following your point. If I were as sure that Obama was going to be re-elected as I am that the sun will rise, I would take Rand Rover’s bet in a New York minute.
But you are presumably declining, so you aren’t as sure as that, so your counter-offer isn’t analogous.
Regards,
Shodan
There’s a > 0 chance that there won’t even be an election for Obama’s second term, but even with a 100% guarantee that that’ll happen, suggesting 15-1 is ridiculous. The US election system simply doesn’t allow for those kinds of odds.
What I’d like to see happen is if he wins, you don’t post for his entire 2nd term, and if he doesn’t, those who made the bet with you don’t post for those 4 years as well.
But I’d like to make that bet later–a lot can happen in between now and then.
Even odds. A thousand dollars. If Barack Obama is re-elected, you pay me a thousand dollars. If anyone else is elected instead, I’ll pay you a thousand dollars. I think that’s fair because I only get one pick and you get the other six billion people on Earth.
I’m not sure that Obama will be re-elected. If I were to guesstimate the odds, I’d say his chances right now of being re-elected are about 60%. 15-1 odds would put his chances of being re-elected up around 93%.
My money is on an Obama/Hillary ticket next year, then a Hillary ticket in 2016.
Well, under current rules, the pool is restricted to native-born Americans who will be at least 35, so… ~200 million? Unless we’re also taking bets on a constitutional amendment; Obama v. Schwarzenegger in 2012?
In any case, 15:1 that someone other than Obama will be taking the oath in 2013… sucker bet.
Okay. How any of our $50 to your $40 that Obama is re-elected? And the bet is null and void if he is dead or incapacitated by illness or trauma. And please remember that from any of our POVs your welching is a very real risk too, a bigger risk since our side would have more money in the pot, really.
Given that Obama is basically polling even with the “generic Republican candidate” (or in some losing slightly) and that he’s floundering and all you should be jumping at this bet.
If you do not then please tell why not.
Who’s side is “our” side, and who’s “you”? And what’s “welching”?
The side that is predicting that Obama will win is the whose side and Rand Rover is who’s “you”.
Welching. “to avoid payment” as in on a bet - although I had never before realized that it had its origins as an ethnic slur against the Welsh and apologize if anyone has taken offense.
I’ll name a bet;
You name a Republican that you think will win and I’ll take Obama. I’ll give you 2:1 since my guy is incumbent. If neither is elected in 2012 then it’s a push. My $100 to your $50.
Neither one of needs the cash so the loser donates to the winner’s charity, stated when the bet is concluded.
Can the charity be the Republican Party? They’re in serious trouble.
Sure, political causes are little more than panhandlers anyway. The more repugnant the more fun. But the winner, by naming it, is explicitly supporting it.
Wow ,the conservatives are betting against Obama’s re-election. What a shock. And of course none is allowing their feelings or politics to color their bet. That just couldn’t be.
Let’s be clear about this… are you going to be offering odds that are better, worse, or about the same that I could get from a bookmaker?
Clearly in any case other than “about the same” one of us will be able to arbitrage… so is this thread really a test of liberals’ financial acu-men?
Cause if so I think you already know the answer 
You seem to be under the impression that you’ve made a point here.