Is there any way to wager on a Presidential or Congressional election?
August 18, 2004 12:31 PM Subscribe
Is there any way (legally or otherwise) to actually wager on an upcoming Presidential or Congressional election [mo inside].
[By the way, anyone remember my last AskMe question about the noise in my wall? I've come to the conclusion that there is a drainpipe/gutter in there, and that it is water in the drainpipe that is the noise. In the winter, the water is freezing and thawing.]
Anyway, about election wagering, I know about the Iowa Electronic Markets. But this is different. I've been arguing politics with strangers on the Internet (which is counter-indicated), and I just don't think that they believe in what they say. And if they were willing to put their money where their mouth is, I'm relatively certain that I'd be coming into some cash. Any ideas on how this could be worked that would be thief-proof? I would just need to deposit cash with a third party that would distribute the money correctly depending on the election results.
[By the way, anyone remember my last AskMe question about the noise in my wall? I've come to the conclusion that there is a drainpipe/gutter in there, and that it is water in the drainpipe that is the noise. In the winter, the water is freezing and thawing.]
Anyway, about election wagering, I know about the Iowa Electronic Markets. But this is different. I've been arguing politics with strangers on the Internet (which is counter-indicated), and I just don't think that they believe in what they say. And if they were willing to put their money where their mouth is, I'm relatively certain that I'd be coming into some cash. Any ideas on how this could be worked that would be thief-proof? I would just need to deposit cash with a third party that would distribute the money correctly depending on the election results.
I would just need to deposit cash with a third party that would distribute the money correctly depending on the election results.
Oh sure, throw your money away. Damned third parties.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:46 PM on August 18, 2004
Oh sure, throw your money away. Damned third parties.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:46 PM on August 18, 2004
I just don't think that they believe in what they say
What difference does that make? (OK, given that my name here is "DevilsAdvocate" you might reasonably conclude that from time to time I make arguments which I don't personally believe in.) But seriously, ask yourself why you're engaging in the online debate.
- Is it because you enjoy the intellectual excercise of the debate? Then it shouldn't matter whether the person you're debating personally agrees with the argument he's making.
- Is it because you hope to convince the other (mostly lurking) readers of the debate of your points? Then it doesn't matter whether your adversary personally believes the arguments he's making. (Even if you could show that he doesn't, that's not likely to convince lurkers who do agree with the arguments he's making.)
- Is it because you hope to convince the actual person you're debating against of your points? In that case, yes, it would be nice to know if he personally already agreed with you, so that you're not wasting your time. But that's only one person.
Ask yourself why you're engaging in the debate. Once you answer this to your own satisfaction, you may well come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter whether your adversary believes the claims he's making.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:50 PM on August 18, 2004
What difference does that make? (OK, given that my name here is "DevilsAdvocate" you might reasonably conclude that from time to time I make arguments which I don't personally believe in.) But seriously, ask yourself why you're engaging in the online debate.
- Is it because you enjoy the intellectual excercise of the debate? Then it shouldn't matter whether the person you're debating personally agrees with the argument he's making.
- Is it because you hope to convince the other (mostly lurking) readers of the debate of your points? Then it doesn't matter whether your adversary personally believes the arguments he's making. (Even if you could show that he doesn't, that's not likely to convince lurkers who do agree with the arguments he's making.)
- Is it because you hope to convince the actual person you're debating against of your points? In that case, yes, it would be nice to know if he personally already agreed with you, so that you're not wasting your time. But that's only one person.
Ask yourself why you're engaging in the debate. Once you answer this to your own satisfaction, you may well come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter whether your adversary believes the claims he's making.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:50 PM on August 18, 2004
From BetOnSports.com,
Which candidate will win the U.S. Presidential Election in 2004?
George W. Bush -160
John Kerry +120
For those of you unfamiliar with reading a bet line it is always against $100. So in order to win $100 you would have to wager $160 on the favorite. However if you wager $100 on the underdog you would get $120. You always get the amount you wager back as well.
I've used BOS and received payouts pretty easily as they can Western Union it to you.
Good luck.
posted by geekyguy at 3:20 PM on August 18, 2004
Which candidate will win the U.S. Presidential Election in 2004?
George W. Bush -160
John Kerry +120
For those of you unfamiliar with reading a bet line it is always against $100. So in order to win $100 you would have to wager $160 on the favorite. However if you wager $100 on the underdog you would get $120. You always get the amount you wager back as well.
I've used BOS and received payouts pretty easily as they can Western Union it to you.
Good luck.
posted by geekyguy at 3:20 PM on August 18, 2004
Oh yeah, per MiguelCardoso's request:
Which party will win the next UK elections?
Labour -500
Conservative +120
Liberal Democrat +750
and
What will be the fate of Osama Bin Laden before 12/31/05? (Note: first option to occur will win, all others will be losers)
Will be consigned to U.S. Authority (Dead or Alive) -200
Will be M.I.A. +150
Will join Saddam Hussein in a World Tour named "World Criminals Unite" +15000
Will visit T.R.L. as a guest +15000
Those are actual available lines
posted by geekyguy at 3:37 PM on August 18, 2004
Which party will win the next UK elections?
Labour -500
Conservative +120
Liberal Democrat +750
and
What will be the fate of Osama Bin Laden before 12/31/05? (Note: first option to occur will win, all others will be losers)
Will be consigned to U.S. Authority (Dead or Alive) -200
Will be M.I.A. +150
Will join Saddam Hussein in a World Tour named "World Criminals Unite" +15000
Will visit T.R.L. as a guest +15000
Those are actual available lines
posted by geekyguy at 3:37 PM on August 18, 2004
It's quite legal in Australia. One of the head guys of TAB (which is the big chain of betting parlors here) was on a chat show called "The Panel" a few weeks ago and mentioned that a lot of people have been wagering on the upcoming Australian election. The hot bet right now is the actual date of the election (since here, like the UK, the PM gets to call it when he wants to). The TAB guy was like, "The election will be October 18th. Mark my words." And the hosts were all, "How can you be so sure?" And he said that they've had a flurry of mysterious bets, all for that date. He says it happens every time. Apparently word gets out and all the insiders have a punt.
posted by web-goddess at 12:57 AM on August 19, 2004
posted by web-goddess at 12:57 AM on August 19, 2004
TradeSports.Com has presidential betting, state by state.
posted by calwatch at 11:03 PM on August 19, 2004
posted by calwatch at 11:03 PM on August 19, 2004
This thread is closed to new comments.
While it's one thing to debate in a forum, a money-or-your-mouth wager is often the lowest of put-downs. Collecting from such instances can prove to be even more frustrating and pointless, as escrow services - respectable ones, anyhow - usually steer cleer of these sort of "investments".
posted by Smart Dalek at 12:48 PM on August 18, 2004