Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Odds on Next President

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by jeffdoorgunnr View Post
    I really think in a twisted way this may help trump. The people are just as fed up with the "media" as the same'o same'o politicians. trump is a total wild card. He also has a thick skin. He has probably been raked over the coals more than just about anyone.........he knows how to fire back and let it roll off his back.......
    I agree. Plus there is the underdog quality: when the media unites on hammering him, I think it will push a lot of independents to his side, because Americans tend to cheer for the underdog.

    His big advantage is that he is not a professional politician, and it shows. He stands out. That is why Cruz and the others have lost to him: he stands out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Escape2Victory
    replied
    Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
    Every wargame with an odds table I have ever played suggests that a 2-1 attack is a good prospect, whereas a 1-3 attack has no hope, often used as a diversion.

    1-3 does NOT mean "a 75% chance" of success. It means 3 chances in every one of failure. 1-3 means you have ONE for every THREE the enemy has. Chances not so good.

    2-1 means you have TWO for every ONE the enemy has, and a much better chance of success.

    According to military theorists and wargame designers, 3-1 is the absolute minimum needed to gurarntee some kind of success. A 3-1 assault, espexially if delivered as a frontal assault, (with no 'turning movement'), will often resuklt in a STALEMATE.

    most wargames with an odds table need 10-1 for an "overrun" where the enemy force is negated with little or no loss to the larger attackers.

    if you have 1-3 odds of winning an election, and your opponent is sitting pretty on 2-1, then you face an uphill struggle.
    If Hillary clinton is only rated 1-3, I would not be wasting my money. 2-1 odds is generally the 'favourite' in a horserace, as well as an election 'race'.
    Again, that is incorrect. You have not understood the betting application, which I supported with a link.

    Here is another one - kindly type 1/3 into the field and let me know the %....

    http://www.bettingexpert.com/how-to/convert-odds
    Last edited by Escape2Victory; 09 May 16, 14:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Wouldn't some of the WW2 propagandists just loved the Internet and Social Media? Just think of the stuff they could have peddled around

    Leave a comment:


  • Combat Engineer
    replied
    Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
    I DID look into it "a wee bit".

    Thats why I'm so dreadfully I'll informed!

    Considering the numberof people on this site alone that have nothing nice to say about Hillary Clinton, I had expected a groundswell of posts telling me all about it.

    So, it looks as if its another 'shaggy dog story'.

    Democrat propaganda can be just as childish....look at "Loose Change" as a prime example of this.
    If you did look, you'd know it's a big internet myth. I suggest looking at better sites and try again.

    Leave a comment:


  • Drusus Nero
    replied
    I DID look into it "a wee bit".

    Thats why I'm so dreadfully I'll informed!

    Considering the numberof people on this site alone that have nothing nice to say about Hillary Clinton, I had expected a groundswell of posts telling me all about it.

    So, it looks as if its another 'shaggy dog story'.

    Democrat propaganda can be just as childish....look at "Loose Change" as a prime example of this.

    Leave a comment:


  • BF69
    replied
    Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
    Ah the 'Clinton body count' internet myth. Why not look into that just a wee bit.....
    Sadly the internet spreads stupid lies around the globe a lot more easily than truth. SIGH!

    Leave a comment:


  • Combat Engineer
    replied
    Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
    In fact, when I think a little more about this, a payout on a horserace of 2-1 means you will get TWO dollars for every ONE invested.

    A payout of 1-3 means you will get ONE dollar for every THREE invested.

    Still thinking of voting Democrat, America?

    BTW, the Clinton "BODY COUNT" has risen to 42, thats 42 people who have died a death under suspicious circumstances that have been associated with the Clintons during their careers.

    All of these people were either staffers or close associates. No, I don't have a list offhand, but a small amount of internet searching yields many names indeed.

    Still want to vote Democrat come November?

    Wonder what the Clinton "Body count" will be before the election run's it's course?
    Ah the 'Clinton body count' internet myth. Why not look into that just a wee bit.....

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
    (...)
    According to military theorists and wargame designers, 3-1 is the absolute minimum needed to gurarntee some kind of success. A 3-1 assault, espexially if delivered as a frontal assault, (with no 'turning movement'), will often resuklt in a STALEMATE.
    Those are "attack odds", they normally refer to quantitative advantages.

    i.e. if your enemy has 500 in a defensive position you'd need 1500 to comfortably attack him.

    Or - you'd need what is known as a "force multiplier" to compensate.

    Those are not to be confused with the "odds" offered by bookies.

    An attack made with 3-1 attack odds will not automatically result in a 1-3 chance to win.

    All other things being equal 3-1 "attacks odds", in a strategic sense, would result in a near 100% chance of victory.

    For betting odds, 3-1 equals a probability of success of 25%, 2-1 somewhere near 33%.

    Something that confuses many would be gamblers
    Last edited by Snowygerry; 09 May 16, 07:43.

    Leave a comment:


  • Drusus Nero
    replied
    In fact, when I think a little more about this, a payout on a horserace of 2-1 means you will get TWO dollars for every ONE invested.

    A payout of 1-3 means you will get ONE dollar for every THREE invested.

    Still thinking of voting Democrat, America?

    BTW, the Clinton "BODY COUNT" has risen to 42, thats 42 people who have died a death under suspicious circumstances that have been associated with the Clintons during their careers.

    All of these people were either staffers or close associates. No, I don't have a list offhand, but a small amount of internet searching yields many names indeed.

    Still want to vote Democrat come November?

    Wonder what the Clinton "Body count" will be before the election run's it's course?

    Leave a comment:


  • Drusus Nero
    replied
    Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
    That is incorrect, unless you state it the other way around in the US.

    Odds of 1-3 implies 75% chance.

    For example..http://www.isfa.com/odds-probability-chart.php
    Every wargame with an odds table I have ever played suggests that a 2-1 attack is a good prospect, whereas a 1-3 attack has no hope, often used as a diversion.

    1-3 does NOT mean "a 75% chance" of success. It means 3 chances in every one of failure. 1-3 means you have ONE for every THREE the enemy has. Chances not so good.

    2-1 means you have TWO for every ONE the enemy has, and a much better chance of success.

    According to military theorists and wargame designers, 3-1 is the absolute minimum needed to gurarntee some kind of success. A 3-1 assault, espexially if delivered as a frontal assault, (with no 'turning movement'), will often resuklt in a STALEMATE.

    most wargames with an odds table need 10-1 for an "overrun" where the enemy force is negated with little or no loss to the larger attackers.

    if you have 1-3 odds of winning an election, and your opponent is sitting pretty on 2-1, then you face an uphill struggle.
    If Hillary clinton is only rated 1-3, I would not be wasting my money. 2-1 odds is generally the 'favourite' in a horserace, as well as an election 'race'.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Biscuit View Post
    Can we just get a Celebrity Deathmatch between the two and be done with it?

    There's no scenario here that ends well for the American people. That's the only thing I'm sure of tonight.
    And sadly it will affect all the rest of us one way or another. Otherwise we could just sit back on the sofa open a beer (dark Trappist for preference) put the feet up and watch the show - after austerity etc etc we could all do with a good laugh.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    Copy paste from the other thread, better fit here,

    My estimate based on observing the micro cosmos that is the ACG.

    Of all those that opposed Obama, only roughly half support Trump, the other half hate him slightly less passionately than they hated Obama.

    No one supports Clinton as no one supported Obama.

    The ACG is completely unrepresentative of the US electorate at large.

    Clinton will win comfortably.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisF1987 View Post
    I agree sadly, this has pretty much been my view all along. Trump vs Clinton is like asking if you want to be shot or stabbed ... they both suck

    Personally though I think Hillary will win, and win big. Ive made peace with this. The good news is that the GOP will probably be able to keep the House and thus will have some sort of a firewall.

    The GOP has the House today and there is no firewall : BHO is acting as will .

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisF1987
    replied
    Originally posted by Biscuit View Post
    Can we just get a Celebrity Deathmatch between the two and be done with it?

    There's no scenario here that ends well for the American people. That's the only thing I'm sure of tonight.
    I agree sadly, this has pretty much been my view all along. Trump vs Clinton is like asking if you want to be shot or stabbed ... they both suck

    Personally though I think Hillary will win, and win big. Ive made peace with this. The good news is that the GOP will probably be able to keep the House and thus will have some sort of a firewall.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by Salinator View Post
    I am not answering for 101, but is simply quoting your post for convenience.

    China do have many unfavorable trading conditions imposed upon American products. We all know it, and just because one has a distaste for Trump does not make it less so. Both McCain and Romney brought up the very same issues during their campaigns. China feels that "Most favored Nation" trading status only applies to themselves.

    The largest electronic consumer market is China. We lost that particular battle in the trade war due to our lack of response to the 30% tariff imposed on US video and audio products.

    China forces American agricultural products to apply for Quarantine Inspection Permits. In other words, they subject our agricultural products to damnation in quarantine while waiting for an inspection permit.

    Why is rice produced in Texas for less than rice grown in Southern China end up costing three times as much as in China than said Southern Chinese rice imported to the US?

    Why does China export rare earth for 5 times the value versus what they sell it for domestically if the product was produced in China such as Apple?

    We don't know what McCain or Romney might have done since they lost their election bids. We do know Hillary will do nothing. We do know that Donald Trump says he will do something.
    What period did this take place? TKS in advance.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X