Gamblers have Lamont vs. Lieberman odds at 3:1

[skipos]

on tradesports.com. I know it isn't a poll, but IMO it is nice to see confidence in a Lamont win.

[Guaranteed]

1. Yup. People are freaking out a bit over one poll- that shows

Lamont winning by a significant margin. :eyes:

[senseandsensibility]

21. Which poll is that?

I'd love to hear more.

[KingFlorez]

2. Some folks are going to lose their money on that bet

[skipos]

5. So you are very confident Joe will win? nt

[Awsi Dooger]

3. It was 4/1 yesterday

Lamont got as high as 82 or 83, not it's drifted down to 75 range which is indeed 3/1.

skipos, check out the big move on Lieberman in the field, on the regular portion of that Connecticut senate race. It had a 16 point bump, up to 41. I guess the narrowing polls give the speculators a belief Lieberman will lose tomorrow then win in November. I think that Field price went down when there was speculation he would abandon that bid. But today he told FOX he would indeed run as an indy if he loses tommorow.

Hey, I've got to go early vote before it closes for the night. On Diebold, no less. How petrifying.

On edit: that's early vote in Nevada, not Connecticut. I was out the door before I realized I hadn't specified that:)

[AlGore-08.com]

4. FWIW, on the HuffPost Zogby says Lamont will win big...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-zogby/has-the-deliebermanizati_b_26636.html

Has the De-Liebermanization of the Democratic Party Begun?
by John Zogby

Connecticut Democrats will go to the polls on Tuesday and the choice will be a defining moment for both the Democratic Party and the nation. While I will stop short of a precise prediction, let me suggest that polling evidence shows that Senator Joseph Lieberman will lose the Senate primary to businessman Ned Lamont by a substantial margin.

Enough of a margin, in fact, to convince his Senate colleagues and friends that he should forego a promised independent run and bow out gracefully. We already see good friends like New Jersey's Frank Lautenberg suggesting that Lieberman will have to drop out and the pressure will build.

(more... )

[MadMaddie]

6. I am saying a prayer tonight for Lamont....because this

country needs his win....

[David Dunham]

7. Zogby also predicted before the 2004 election Kerry would win

Zogby makes lots of errors.

[whalerider55]

9. kerry did win

you can't account in polling for people who say they vote for someone, only to have their vote not counted b/c of irregularities.

whalerider

[bananas]

12. Maybe they should start accounting for it

"We predict that more people will try to vote for (Dem candidate),
but the Republicans will steal it by xxx votes."

[AlGore-08.com]

11. How far ahead are you talking about?

In the late spring, Zogby said the election was Kerry's to loose. But Zogby's last poll prior to election day had Smirk 49.4% Kerry 49.1%.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

Regardless, the fact that it's his opinion is why I labeled it "FWIW".

[high density]

15. Election eve...

Zogby said Kerry was going to be president on his website... 300+ electoral votes. I have the page saved on my hard drive somewhere.

[bullimiami]

13. zogby didnt trust his own poll to prove that the election was fraudulant.

then he analyzed the reason kerry 'lost' afterward.

now thats stupid.

[Nederland]

20. Zogby doesn't do exit polls (nt)

[bullimiami]

23. he sure did plenty of polling before the election though and then had to

either admit there were dirty tricks or his polling was bunk.

he didnt blame the vote counting.



of course zogby doesnt do exit polls. duh.

[MsMagnificent]

19. I'll bet the odds would be much lower if

Connecticut used Diebold machines


(Nope, I'm not getting over it... prolly never shall)

[jumpoffdaplanet]

10. Any info on often Zogby is correct

50%, 75%, 90%

[pennylane100]

8. Does anyone know if Ladbrokes of London is giving odds.

They seem to be pretty reliable bookmakers. However, I would only bet if they had Lamont as the odds on favorite, then I might bet the farm (If I had one).

[Awsi Dooger]

14. Nothing on Ladbrokes, and Lamont is the odds on favorite

Ladbrokes is fairly conservative on US political betting. All they have is the future book on the 2008 presidential election, with Democrats a slight favorite. I don't have an account there but on their site there isn't anything on the midterms or this Connecticut primary.

Odds on means greater likelihood than all other possibilities combined. It's routinely flubbed by sports commentators who will call the Colts, for example, the odds on favorite to win the Super Bowl when in fact they are 5/1 or 6/1.

In politics in a one-on-one race there is always an odds on favorite, unless both are pick'em odds. But this does bring up an interesting point. If Lamont wins the primary but Lieberman insists on running as an independent, there is a very slight chance the favorite, Lieberman, will not be odds on. It would be a good chance of that if the GOP candidate had any strength, but since Schlesinger is a glorified write-in candidate the betting odds will all but ignore him. He was at 3% this week.

[underpants]

16. YEAH GO LAMONT!!

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. cool

[KKKarl is an idiot]

18. Man I am hoping for a good win

This will put pay to any talk of Lieberman running as an independent.

[Guaranteed]

25. Yup- that's where we need to be going to now. We need to

TROUNCE this guy.

[caligirl]

22. Joe + W's fab. wedding, Funny flick, folksy music, a pointed commentary

http://fabulouswedding.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

[Awsi Dooger]

24. Lamont is now trading at 87-13 on Tradesports

http://tradesports.com/aav2/trading/tradingHTML.jsp?evID=55569&eventSelect=55569&updateList=true&showExpired=false

That's more than a 6/1 favorite. I doubt there's any inside info, other than reports of high turnout in Lamont areas.

Tradesports is man-to-man so it allows wagering while an event is underway.