When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

I am still not sure that you understand what my prediction is.

I understand your prediction to be that the Republican candidate inevitably wins come November 2016.

oralloy wrote:

However I am open to betting. Note though that I never bet money. I prefer friendly bets where one side simply admits that they are wrong.

Works for me.

oralloy wrote:

I'm not sure how odds would come into play. I'm either 100% right or I am 100% wrong. We'll know which it is come election night.

True, but right now we don't know which. Odds come into play because they measure people's confidence in their predictions. For example, if we did bet for money, and you really think a Republican president is inevitable, you should take a bet even at very short odds like 99:1, because you would still expect it to be profitable. (99:1 means that you put 99 cents on the table, I put 1 cent on the table, and whoever wins gets the whole sum once we know).

As for myself, I think a Democratic victory is more likely than a Republican victory, but I don't yet have any strong opinion on how much more likely. So if we did bet for money, something like 60:40 sounds about right for the odds I would currently accept for a Democratic president in 2016.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

That is wishful thinking. The Oil and Gas industry is far more powerful than the NRA.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

PS: Now that I brought up the issue, I thought it might be interesting to check what odds are currently in play among professional bookies. The first number I found today was 4/6 for a Democratic president and 6/5 for a Republican president. This implies that the probability of a Democratic president is between 55 and 60 percent. At odds like these, I theoretically am just about indifferent between taking them and leaving them alone. In practice, I'm not going to bother. But if Oralloy really thinks a Republican president is inevitable in 2016, why not go to the open betting market and put large sums of his money where his mouth is? After all, he says he would inevitably get rich!

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The 2013 gun debate has been over for some time, it is just too ridiculous for you to say that gun debate had/has or will have such big impact on why the President's agenda hasn't passed congress leading up to 2016.

Quote:

Republicans have a long list of priorities, chief among them unraveling many of the president's signature policies on energy, health care, the environment, and banking.

source

Those issues are much more important for republicans in congress than the 2013 gun debate. The gun debate didn't change anyone in congress or voters, those who were against common sense laws passed in the gun debate were already against Obama before the gun debate both inside congress and outside congress. McConnell on day one decided the course of the Obama Presidency and the role congress would play in it and he and all the others have stuck to it regardless of what is good for the country or what the people want, who by the way, wanted those common sense laws passed. The gun debate is just one issue and not high on the list of importance for republicans in congress. More than any other issue it has been "Obamacare", environmental regulation issues and regulations in general and passing the pipeline deal and immigration and foreign policy.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

oralloy wrote:
I am still not sure that you understand what my prediction is.

I understand your prediction to be that the Republican candidate inevitably wins come November 2016.

Correct.

Thomas wrote:

oralloy wrote:
I never bet money. I prefer friendly bets where one side simply admits that they are wrong.

Works for me.

Ok. I agree to said bet then.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

The 2013 gun debate has been over for some time, it is just too ridiculous for you to say that gun debate had/has or will have such big impact on why the President's agenda hasn't passed congress leading up to 2016.

It is the issue that Mr. Obama expended every last bit of his second-term political capital on.

revelette2 wrote:

Quote:
Republicans have a long list of priorities, chief among them unraveling many of the president's signature policies on energy, health care, the environment, and banking.

source

Those issues are much more important for republicans in congress than the 2013 gun debate. The gun debate didn't change anyone in congress or voters, those who were against common sense laws passed in the gun debate were already against Obama before the gun debate both inside congress and outside congress. McConnell on day one decided the course of the Obama Presidency and the role congress would play in it and he and all the others have stuck to it regardless of what is good for the country or what the people want, who by the way, wanted those common sense laws passed. The gun debate is just one issue and not high on the list of importance for republicans in congress. More than any other issue it has been "Obamacare", environmental regulation issues and regulations in general and passing the pipeline deal and immigration and foreign policy.

None of that changes the fact that Mr. Obama expended every last bit of his second-term political capital fighting the NRA instead of doing something else with it.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

That is wishful thinking. The Oil and Gas industry is far more powerful than the NRA.

I doubt it.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

But if Oralloy really thinks a Republican president is inevitable in 2016, why not go to the open betting market and put large sums of his money where his mouth is? After all, he says he would inevitably get rich!

I'm not really into gambling.

I did look at one of those "betting on the issues" sites years ago when they were in the news (sometime during W's second term I believe) and saw that I could make a huge profit by placing money on there not being a renewal of federal assault weapons legislation within 10 years. I guess I could be rich now if I'd done so. Meh.

I remember being incredulous that so many people didn't understand how powerful the NRA is.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

I remember being incredulous that so many people didn't understand how powerful the NRA is.

I noticed a headline about a month ago to the effect "Is the gun debate over, Did the NRA win?"

It does seem that they have. Hillary has taken a lot of positions for this run at POTUS, when has she talked about guns?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

I'm not really into gambling.

Neither am I. But if a casino offered me 60:40 odds on a bet I would inevitably win, I would change my mind, withdraw all my savings, take them to the casino, buy my chips, and place them. Let's get rich and fleece some silly liberals as a fringe benefit!

That being said, I think I made my point and will stop belaboring it. Smile

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Obama didn't expend all his political capital on the gun debate because he had no capital to expend with republicans before the debate even begun so the debate made no difference whatsoever.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Obama didn't expend all his political capital on the gun debate because he had no capital to expend with republicans before the debate even begun so the debate made no difference whatsoever.

He did not do it because the D's would have killed him, the last thing they want to see when they are devoted to beating the R's is this issue, which divides the D's. Plus it is a loser. There was no upside for Obama to go after this other than maybe legacy, and that was not enough.

I expect that Hillary has come to the same conclusions.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

I guess we will know about the power of the NRA come November 2016.

If Hillary loses, according to many here, it shows the awesome power of the NRA.

If Hillary wins, however, I guess that will mean that the NRA has lost its clout.

So...all we have to do wait a while.

Fine with me.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I guess we will know about the power of the NRA come November 2016.

If Hillary loses, according to many here, it shows the awesome power of the NRA.

If Hillary wins, however, I guess that will mean that the NRA has lost its clout.

So...all we have to do wait a while.

Fine with me.

There is some confusion here.

When Hillary loses, it will not be because the NRA opposed her in 2016. It will be an inadvertent side effect of Mr. Obama's catastrophic defeat at the hands of the NRA back in 2013.

The fight in 2013 is long over. There is no need to wait to see how powerful the NRA is. That the NRA stopped federal gun control legislation cold is a matter of historical record.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

He did not do it because the D's would have killed him, the last thing they want to see when they are devoted to beating the R's is this issue, which divides the D's. Plus it is a loser. There was no upside for Obama to go after this other than maybe legacy, and that was not enough.

He DID do it.

Mr. Obama wasted all of his second-term political capital in a direct frontal assault against the NRA.

It is the reason why he has no legislative achievements in his second term.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Obama didn't expend all his political capital on the gun debate because he had no capital to expend with republicans before the debate even begun so the debate made no difference whatsoever.

When a president is elected, he begins his term with political capital that he can use to force a legislative agenda.

And in fact we saw the use of that political capital when Mr. Obama forced the Senate to take up the gun issue to begin with, and then again when he bullied the Senate into voting to allow a floor debate.

Had Mr. Obama not been expending all of his political capital on the issue, none of that would ever have happened.

And had Mr. Obama instead expended his political capital driving some other issue forward, that legislation likely would have passed, giving him a major achievement for his second term.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
He did not do it because the D's would have killed him, the last thing they want to see when they are devoted to beating the R's is this issue, which divides the D's. Plus it is a loser. There was no upside for Obama to go after this other than maybe legacy, and that was not enough.

He DID do it.

Mr. Obama wasted all of his second-term political capital in a direct frontal assault against the NRA.

It is the reason why he has no legislative achievements in his second term.

No way, he talked about it. He gave a bunch of morality lectures. But he only made a half assed effort at xoing anything.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Oh, please, it don't matter what issue Obama brings up or when, the republicans are going to be against it or remain as silent as possible. He has never had any political capital with the republicans. If Sandy Hook never happened and 2013 debate never happened, republicans still would not have compromised on any of Obama's agenda and they didn't before the debate.

Moreover, Hawkeye is right in that democrats are more divided on the issue of gun control than the more left wing of the party would like.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Have you noticed that after oralloyboy is caught in a lie he posts 4 or 5 posts in a row believing that it will fool people into believing that he isent a blantant lying two faced prick?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I guess we will know about the power of the NRA come November 2016.

If Hillary loses, according to many here, it shows the awesome power of the NRA.

If Hillary wins, however, I guess that will mean that the NRA has lost its clout.

So...all we have to do wait a while.

Fine with me.

There is some confusion here.

There is no confusion whatsoever.

But it seems your story has taken a slight turn.

Okay...that happens.

In any case, I think Hillary, if she is the top of the Dem ticket, will win...and win handily. So in effect, Oralloy, I am saying it is my opinion that your analysis of the impact of the supposed defeat of the NRA against Obama is a miscalculation on your part.

In November 2016 we will see.

Wait we must.

1 Reply

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know