April 11, 2007 at 16:49 #1341
I believe John Edwards is home and hosed for the Democratic presidential candidacy and is outstanding value on Betfair at 7s. I’ve predicted Democratic wns in the last 2 presidential elections and this last mid-term one, which they won, in spite of the still masivce fraud by the neocon Republicans.
All the fraud in these elections – starting with the selection in 2002 by the Supreme Court – which statisticians have proved beyond all doubt were won by very very comfortable margins – in fact, landslides – by the Democratic candidate. Ther are just too many homeless families, and too many that are a pay-cheque away from losing their home. And, as in the UK, all but the top management are being clobbered.
Now, at least with the democrats able to chair the oversight committees, it’s all coming out, together with endless criminality, by way of war profiteering and any other kind of corruption you care to mention.
Consequently, though their fraud was inhibited in the mid-terms, hence the Dems gaining of both houses, it was still subtantial enough to rob them of an outright landslide: 75% of the vote.
The ever corrupt mainstream media are pushing Hillary Clinton, who, like Bill, only knows how to hang on the coat-tails of the Republicans. (Good people nevertheless).
On the other hand, the American people know that they need radical a radical, root and branch clean out of the Augean stables – as also in the UK – and a welfare state. Though the British middle classes seem catatonic.
They need a national health service and like us, a rebuilding of the whole of the country’s infrastructure, material and social; fairer taxation, public transport, education, to name a few.
Consequently, there is evidence that people are turning to Edwards in large numbers, as they had turned to Kerry, only to be cheated by the massive fraud.
Edwards has a track record of defending the "little guy" against the insurance companies, banks, etc. Corporatist Big Business, and has defined clear policies that he would implement.
7/1 looks an absolute steal. Imo, evens does. I tokk 7s long ago, and now Ladbrokes are not even quoting him!
(Edited by Grimes at 5:55 pm on April 11, 2007)April 11, 2007 at 20:28 #50948cheltboyMember
- Total Posts 129
As someone who is sitting on 50-1 for barack to be president I have to disagree. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â The shrewdies on political betting would laugh their heads off at yr post. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â <br>As for the republicans, watch fred thompson.
(Edited by cheltboy at 9:28 pm on April 11, 2007)April 11, 2007 at 20:38 #50949
Its between Clinton and Obama for the nomination. Clinton is the favourite amongst Democrats at the moment but Obama will do better with voters in a head to head with Giuliani which may well get him the nomination. He’s closing on Clinton all the time, is very charasmatic which will be of enormous assistance to him when campaigning proper starts. Dont see how Edwards even comes into it, he’s only at 15% for the nomination.
Obama at 3.7 is the value.
Now back to the horses.
(Edited by Cavelino Rampante at 9:39 pm on April 11, 2007)April 11, 2007 at 22:29 #50950
Republicans? Who are they? They’re finished. All the decent, even half-decent ones Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â have left. These are savages, wild animals, like the current, new Tories.
Eisenhower, himself a Republican of the old school, foresaw that the military-industrial complex would gain more and more power and hold the country in thrall. Precisely, what has happened.
Incidentally Major is a signficant shareholder, maybe even a director, in the Carlyle Group (Halliburton, Bechtel, etc); also that Black Wednesday Chancellor (or whatever day it was), the character they called Badger.
I won’t argue with you about Edwards and Obama. Wait and see. Both of you.
Cavelino, I’ve got news for you. Clinton has mine and Buckly’s chance. She’s the darling of the Beltway, but that’s not the public. To understand what’s going on in the country, you need to follow the progressive Democratic blogs.
Incidentally, I revise my odds. 1/2 for Edwards is a steal. Without major fraud again, I don’t believe it will be possible to beat him.
If Kerry were to decide to enter the fray, that could complicate things, but at the moment he feels his country needs him to prioritise his current job.
(Edited by Grimes at 11:32 pm on April 11, 2007)April 11, 2007 at 22:47 #50951Mr FriskParticipant
- Total Posts 163
But surely a good deal of this applied last time around too – Southern base, smooth operator, nice smile etc etc – and they didn’t pick him then, in what is always a fallow period for either party when they have to face an incumbent.
So why would they do it now when there are two alternatives who would both have knocked Kerry into the proverbial receptacle four years ago?April 11, 2007 at 22:52 #50952
To understand whats going on in the country you need to read reliable opinion polls. The polls I’m using were 95% accurate in 2004 and 2006. Edwards hasnt got a breeze.April 11, 2007 at 22:59 #50953
Cavelino, you are living in a fantasy world. there are no reliable opinion polls in the US. They are a primary propaganda tool. Period. 95%? They must have been "onto" the massive electoral fraud and factored it in.
Here’s just one indication of the reality. Retired captain of industry, Lee Aiacocca has this to say:
(Edited by Grimes at 12:02 am on April 12, 2007)April 11, 2007 at 23:06 #50954
Mr Frisk, you obviously haven’t seen the photos of the mobs who turned out to just catch a glimpse of John Kerry when he campaigned. As far as the eye could see, wherever he went. He also won the popular vote, by the way, in spite of the massive fraud.
But hey, I’m so confident you are all living in cloud cuckoo land, I’ve no inerest in arguing, truth to tell. I’ve just told you for the record. Now, let’s wait.April 11, 2007 at 23:09 #50955
The poll I used in 2004 was accurate to within a half percent for both candidates.
I agree with all the opinions raised in that article you pasted the link to. All of that was equally true before 2004 as well but Bush still got reelected.
Whatever your opinion the fact is that Edwards hasnt got a hope this time around either.April 12, 2007 at 11:33 #50956Mr FriskParticipant
- Total Posts 163
Al Gore won the popular vote, Kerry did not. It was Bush 51-49.April 12, 2007 at 11:44 #50957aphardyMember
- Total Posts 190
We’ll be discussing who we think the value bet is in "Any Dream will Do" soon! Or how about the Apprentice?
Last time I looked, this forum was called "Horse Racing"…April 12, 2007 at 15:58 #50959dave jayMember
- Total Posts 3386
Quote: from Cavelino Rampante on 12:09 am on April 12, 2007[br]The poll I used in 2004 was accurate to within a half percent for both candidates.<br>
<br>That poll was wrong, because the fraud involved making 1000’s of votes disappear, in Tampa I think which, would have won Florida for the Democrats and thrown Bush out on his idiotic ear. Unless the poll you used was like Fox news and they knew the election was going to be rigged before it happened.April 12, 2007 at 18:28 #50961PompeteMember
- Total Posts 2391
Dave…the problem is you, me or anybody else can call it fraud…(which I do believe happened)…but the Supreme Court didn’t (another fraud?). The bottom line is Money and Power (if there’s a difference) prevail. So, do not bet on this market, as our American’s friends say, Period.April 12, 2007 at 20:07 #50963jpMember
- Total Posts 9
I think what everybody is forgetting is that the opinion polls now count for very little in the grand scheme of things. We probably have the most open primaries since 1992 and, in November 1991 Clinton was eleventh. In November 2003 John Kerry was only running around fifth.
Personal, I think that Obama is a media talking horse and will probably be found out in New Hampshire or Iowa. Key to Edwards chances are that he has been working Iowa and NH furiously and a victory in these early primaries can give a campaign irresistible momentum.
The GOP primary looks equally fasinating.
By the way, the "shrewdies" at political betting get things wrong at least as often as they get things right.
We have discussed the primaries on my blog. WOrth a look if you are interested:April 12, 2007 at 21:20 #50964DeadlySinsMember
- Total Posts 105
I reckon Hilary has had the wind in her sails before she even declared interest in the Presidency, I think it would be foolish to write off Barack Obama at what is still an early stage in the election but I believe America will have its first female no.1 in 2008.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.