I have no idea about William Hill. But the odds they describe sound about right to me, and the Nate Silver thing and the summary of Trump’s speech sound informative

inb4 BIDEN COPIUM HAHAHA etc and etc

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Sorry but “BIDEN COPIUM HAHAHA” is right.

    The William Hill odds of a Trump victory in November lengthened from 2/5 (71.4 percent) on Thursday before his convention address to 8/15 (65.2 percent) on Friday.

    Donald Trump remains the overwhelming favorite

    This same agency is saying Kamala Harris already has better odds of becoming President than Joe Biden does, even without a decision to resign from Biden.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Paying out higher (better) odds means you think they’re less likely to win

      Edit: They were initially confused about how betting odds work, now they’re confused about how outcomes work.

      William Hill is saying that Trump has a 65% chance to win, and the Democrat has roughly a 35% chance to win, and that Democrat is much more likely to be Kamala than Biden. There is absolutely no conditional involved in this odds presentation that would imply who has a better chance of beating Trump, as separated from the question of how likely the Democrats are to replace Biden.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think the chances of Harris vs Biden winning are incorporated into this percentage. But it doesn’t separate out the factors such as likelihood of being the nominee vs likelihood of winning the GE. So we can’t say anything definitive about that without more information on how it’s being calculated.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The article says P(Biden wins) < P(Harris wins). It isn’t saying anything directly about P(Biden nominated) or P(Biden wins | Biden nominated) but it does imply that P(Biden nominated) is low.

  • elgordino@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve been tracking the odds on Betfair. They have moved from 1.54 to 1.58 (decimal odds, 1 is dead cert, 2 is 50/50), so very marginally less likely Trump win. ‘Slumped’ they have not.

    Harris is at 5.4 and Biden way behind at 15.5.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Where are you looking and when did it say it was updated?

      Here’s what I see on Betfair; updated as of July 13th it says:

      • Donald Trump = 1.654/6 = 1.28 decimal = 78% win
      • Joe Biden = 10.09/1 = 11.1 decimal = 9% win
      • Kamala Harris = 5.69/2 = 3.85 decimal = 26% win

      (Note they sum to more than 100%, because of the “house cut” nonreciprocal nature of the odds)

      If there are more recently updated numbers that now say 1.58 decimal, that would mean the odds of Trump winning have dropped from 78% to 63%. I’d say that’s a fuckin slump.

      (Also note - that doesn’t mean they think Biden has a 10% chance of winning if he stays in. It means the chance he will stay on as the nominee times the chance he will win in the election is 10% – although looking at their odds for who the D nominee will be, it looks like they also think he has a lower chance of winning than Kamala, if he is the nominee.)

      • elgordino@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just from my own screenshots yesterday and today. I have a couple of really small bets in play.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    Okay, Democrats, what’s the play here then? Better ride this news with some really strong moves to amplify the impact. Don’t fuck it up, PLEASE.

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Expecting the Dems to do a 180 and actually not fuck up is a bold expectation. JFC we need more agile leadership…

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      One of my favorite quotes about Democrats (other than that they form circular firing squads) is that “Democrats will never pass up the opportunity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

      :(

    • Noxy@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      definitely a wisconsin thing. I had a foam cheesehead when I was a kid.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      As someone mentioned, Wisconsin is known for cheese, lots and lots of dairy farms and whatnot out there.

      I actually have a coworker who came from Wisconsin and he will walk around drinking a 1/4 gallon of milk regularly lol

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    You think everyone is just tired of this shit? Both these dudes are older than my grandfather when he died. I am fucking tired boss. It shouldn’t be this crazy just to get sensible candidates who are actual human beings. It really shouldn’t.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      100
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      If only the well wasn’t poisoned with REPLACE BIDEN NOW OR WORLD WILL END ALSO KAMALA SUCKS bullshit, 5-10 times every hour, some of it coming yesterday still with fresh Cyrillic in its video description, we could have an adult conversation about what a good Democratic strategy would be, so that the end of the world doesn’t get elected

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Absolutely correct. But even if the choice is a shitty one it’s also a very easy one. If you want fascism, vote for Trump. If not, vote for Biden.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Or whoever the Democratic nominee is

        There’s a perfectly reasonable conversation to be had about replacing Biden being a better strategy. 10 seconds of thinking will lead one to realize that figuring out the strategy, and then switching to it, is way better than dumping Biden and then figuring out the strategy afterwards. And, it’s notable that all the same outlets who are openly hostile to democracy in the United States were the ones that were pushing so hard on the backwards version of the strategy, until the more gullible parts of the Democratic Party apparatus eventually picked it up and started running with it.

        The forward strategy is still fine. The loud preemptive drumbeat of hard criticism of Kamala that is now emerging, though, should hopefully serve as a big loud blaring fucking wake up call to anyone who is sincerely interested in defeating Trump who is still echoing the backwards version.

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’ve said it before I’ll say it again. I’m voting for Kamala but it’s not clear she’s better than Biden as a strategy.

          But what is clear is that Kamala is better than nearly everyone else the Democrats can crown between today and the DNC. We only have a 4 months before the election and Kamala is the only one who was actually campaigning at all.

          So if we replace Biden, it’s almost purely to give Kamala a running mate. That’s about it, and these value in this.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah. To me the only options with any level of realistic viability are:

            1. Biden
            2. Harris
            3. Contested convention, someone with a baseball bat in hand talks firmly to the DNC about not fucking everything up with their foot on the scales like they did in 1968 and 2016, and see what shakes out of an actually fair process

            Anything else is nonsense. I have no real ironclad feelings about which of those options is best, although I lean towards 1 or 3, but the DUMP BIDEN RIGHT NOW, NOW NOW NOW, DON’T THINK ABOUT IT BOY DON’T ASK QUESTIONS JUST DO IT OR ELSE YOU DOOM AMERICA AND IT’LL ALL BE YOUR FAULT idea doesn’t appear in that list. To me.

            • dragontamer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Yeah. I’m not against removing Biden (even if I think keeping Biden is the best option). I’m just against a brainless, plan less removal of Biden.

              I’ve pointed out how Liberals rallied in 2011 for Occupy Wall Street only for Republicans to win in 2012, 2014 and 2016. People need to think about politics of they ever want to get ahead.

              It’s not sufficient to just get together in a large rally. We need actual votes.


              I feel like #2 and #3 will likely lead to Kamala. I’m up for an open and fair convention even if Kamala isn’t selected.

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not voting for either candidate, I am voting for the people around Biden and against people that support P2025. Pretty simple.

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        As someone who didn’t think Biden was a good choice in 2020 I fully agree, his administration seems to actually make things better!

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      If a hypothetical person with all your favorite attributes got elected, after 2 years of propaganda you’d be complaining about how awful they are.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Idk the Drop Biden propaganda isn’t really landing with me, and I dont do any other media besides Lemmy. Plus, working in construction has me surrounded by Trumpets everywhere and its not convincing me at all. I’m not immune by any means, but I’m not a fair weather fan either.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well that’s a click bait title. It’s based on betting markets that the head line completely misinterprets. The article itself admits Trump is still the favorite by far.

      • dingdongmetacarples@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        So what are they basing this article on? William Hill odds? Nate Silver’s opinion? I wouldn’t put much stock in that. Is Trump going to lose 4 points of support because of a speech? Doubtful.

        • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          He’s basing it on none of that. Newsweek pumps out Biden copium articles like crazy and the same few rotating accounts post every single one of them.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    2 months ago

    The people that vote for trump don’t care.

    Christ, they wear diapers and put fake ear bandages on. You think they give a damn about what’s actually right?

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        If your vote didn’t matter, try wouldn’t be trying to make it harder (or blocking efforts to make it easier).

        VOTE

        • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          28
          ·
          2 months ago

          Please do explain how the necessity of further action “makes it harder to vote”.

          If people are so pathologically demand-avoidant that asking them to do more than just vote makes them stop voting then yelling at them to vote isn’t going to help either.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve basically given up worrying about federal politics; I STILL VOTE IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS, but it’s clear they’re too solidly captured by special interests to do much there. I’ve shifted my focus to local/municipal politics and found a lot more success there.

    • Delusional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yup the idiots will still vote for him no matter what happens. Aliens could pop out of his skull and claim they’ve been operating him all along to destroy the earth and they’d still vote for him.