If this holds true, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney would be the only two Republican candidates consistently placing among the top 3.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 01/03/2008 6:44:03 AM PST by SubGeniusX
Online oddsmakers have Ron Paul in a comfortable third place finish among bettors in both the Republican Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary.
While third place may not be as good as an outright win, it's good enough to boost momentum for Ron Paul heading into future primaries where his treasure chest for advertising totals upwards of $20 mil. Many of the 2008 US Republican Presidential candidate's supporters believe that once voters realize Paul is a formidable candidate, finishing among the top 3, more Americans are likely to vote for him.
Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney were in a virtual deadlock as the two favorites to win the 2008 Iowa Caucus on the Republican side. Huckabee had odds of -165 while Romney had odds of -130. Ron Paul came in third, two points ahead of Senator John McCain, with the potential payout of $5.00 for every $1.00 bet if he were to win in Iowa.
Yesterday, Gambling911.com reported on how Ron Paul was also listed with the third best odds to take New Hampshire behind both John McCain and Mitt Romney.
If this holds true, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney would be the only two Republican candidates consistently placing among the top 3.
Mainstream media referenced polls tend to place the long time Texas Congressman 4th and 5th, depending on the Primary.
Fox News has excluded Ron Paul from an upcoming Republican debate in New Hampshire, much to the dismay of his loyal support base. An AOL poll showed 96% of all respondents believed that Fox News was wrong in its decision to exclude Dr. Paul.
Political prediction markets provide us -- the consumers of this information -- with a way to cut through this clutter.
A prediction market is a bit like the stock market, except that you are buying shares whose value depends on the success of a political candidate, rather than the profits earned by a corporation. And just as stock prices are a useful barometer of the health of a company, so too the price of a prediction contract is a barometer of the health of a political campaign.
Bookmaker.com is a most interesting firm when it comes to prediction indicators. They have a reputation for being the sharpest bookmakers offshore today with the most "wise guy" or professional sports betting action going through their organization on a daily basis. The company was offering a line of $6 million on the amount of money OVER/UNDER Ron Paul would raise in a single day last month (he raised just over $6 million). Brisk action on this bet and the OVER had been reported by Bookmaker.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
That’s not why we’re voting for him.
What will be interesting is if the enthusiasm and spirit of Paul supporters translates into significantly higher turnout percentages than other candidates achieve. Purely as a hypothetical example, if he were to have 90% of his Iowan supporters caucus, while other candidates averaged only 30% of their supporters at the caucus, then Paul's 10% poll numbers suddenly equal Huckabee's 30% poll numbers, and may better them depending on how biased the poll actually is.
Then why?
Seriously, you’re asking? Is this your first Ron Paul thread? :)
Because we’re tired of voting for evil because it’s the lesser of two.
Because we don’t want to elect an alleged Republican who will grow the government about 2% slower than a Democrat.
Because we’re sick of the way our government tramples and ignores us.
Because none of the other Republican candidates are true conservatives.
Don’t have time to give you an extensive list, so I’ll just bullet it.
Giuliani = gun-grabbing social liberal.
McCain = McCain/Feingold. (And let’s not forget the whole Keating Five thing.)
Romney = let’s face it, if you’re a Republican who can get elected in Massachusetts, odds are you ain’t that conservative.
Thompson = globalist.
Huckabee = pro-life, otherwise a nanny-stater.
Hunter = heavy into government expansion.
Is that all, or do I need to count Alan Keyes? I wasn’t even aware he was running until, like, yesterday.
I would add that Dr. Paul doesn’t actually believe we have no enemies. How did you form that conclusion?
ROTFLMAO. Are you young, or just terminally naive? Life itself is nothing but a series of choices and most often never ideal choices. Why should political choices be any different?
Because none of the other Republican candidates are true conservatives.
RP is a lot of things, but conservative has never been one of them. That Paul would walk away from the WOT because that option fits his twisted libertarian ideology makes him the worst of all possible choices on the Republican side. He would get a hell of a lot of innocent people killed just as certainly as a moonbat like Kucinich would. I see no difference between the two on the only issue that really matters from a presidential standpoint.
No, we actually listen to what HE says, as opposed to the constructs the media and his opponents apply to his words.
That’s because you listen to how people like Rudy Giuliani characterize Dr. Paul, and not to Dr. Paul’s actual words.
Critical thinking, as my husband observes, hurts.
I will agree to disagree, cordially of course, because I never heard him say any such thing.
(And it goes without saying that if I do find out he said that, I will apologize to you.)
Thanks. Do me a favor PLEASE do say “agree to disagree”. I can not say why but that phrase just grates on me something awful.
No, I have heard his words many times over the years. He's a zealot driven by his ideology, not reality. People like him are curiosities when sitting on a back bench in congress, but they are damn dangerous in any position of authority. As I said before, I see no difference between Paul and Kucinich. They are both ideologues.
Critical thinking, as my husband observes, hurts.
Then do a little critical thinking about what happens when there is no US presence in the Mideast and lunatic mullahs with a hatred for modernity have nuke weapons and control of 60% of the world's oil supply.
That's exactly what you are voting for.
Oh thats rich!
Have you checked the casualty list lately of our troops.And don't forget the innocent civillians.Or do they count?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.