The odds of Trump securing victory over Biden have lengthened from 2/5 on Thursday to 8/15 on Friday, according to William Hill.

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

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        414·
        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
          315·
          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
        121·
        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
      7·
      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.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
    731·
    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
      7711·
      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
      323·
      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
        273·
        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.worldEnglish
          1·
          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
            1·
            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.

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      241·
      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.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    329·
    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
      212·
      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.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        8·
        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.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        2·
        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.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    16·
    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.

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.eeEnglish
    7·
    2 months ago

    Over the same period, Biden’s odds of securing reelection later this year deteriorated substantially to just 12/1 (7.7 percent) as the president faces pressure from within his own party to withdraw from the race.

    Donald Trump remains the overwhelming favorite, but his odds have lengthened a touch – now 8/15 to return to the White House.

    Yeah…

  • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
    6·
    2 months ago

    Newsweek seems to be the only publication making these claims. We’ve had some 2-3 weeks of Newsweek reportage of the Trump campaign floundering, its wheels falling off, and it circling the drain. Given Newsweek’s right-wing ownership and recently poor reputation for facts, it does feel like an op (perhaps to lull progressive campaigners into a false sense of security?)

  • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
    6·
    2 months ago

    Look what was the big things coming out of the RNC.

    1. A bulldog
    2. The troll that protects the water hazards on Trump’s courses (Kimberly Guilfoyle).
    3. The shocked remains of Florida pedo (Matt Gaetz).
    4. Racist, washed up, whats to fuck his daughter (Hogan).
    5. The UFC (Dana White).
    6. Shit kid rock song
    7. The most gay entrance you could do outside of Vegas or Broadway (Trump).

    No one cares except MAGA country. It is boring.

  • elgordino@fedia.io
    3·
    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
      11·
      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
        1·
        2 months ago

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

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      While it looks like half the country is split between this dipshits, in reality the majority of Americans agree on a shockingly high number of issues.

      One of those issues is that both options are fucking awful, so who’s “losing” harder is matter of witchcraft at the moment as things violently spiral into the ridiculous

  • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    I do think it’s funny that Biden’s team has figured out that the winningest move is to just talk about Republican policies, 2025, etc. My entire life I’ve pretty much only wanted to talk policy and rolled my eyes at every single other thing that people said mattered, and it’s like I’m finally getting just a little vindication.

    • jeeva@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 months ago

      The only sad thing is that it seems like they’re (still?) only talking about the other side’s policy, rather than backing their own policy based on its strength.

      Just “I’m not the other side” (but at least with policy rather than personality)

      • dingdongmetacarples@lemmy.world
        5·
        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
          53·
          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.