The 2016 United States Presidential Election ended as one of the biggest Political betting upsets of all time. Accordingly, so called “Presidential Historians,” “experts,” and “insiders” were confounded. Account of Donald Trump’s stunning and historic triumph gamblers discovered upset specials are not limited to sports. Yet the election of Trump, shocking as it was, is a great lesson for all gamblers. And for anyone who thinks that “The Donald” is guaranteed to lose in 2020.
Consensus Proven Wrong
Regardless of which side gamblers were on the Online wagering consensus was that Hillary Clinton wound defeat Trump in a landslide. But for those taking a deeper dive there were warning signs. In a similar manner handicapping the 2016 election required using more alternative outlets for information. To begin with the bias of traditional media was over the top in 2016. To bring to light that bias was an awkward acknowledgment from the New York Times. As a matter of fact, their editor issued a written apology to readers after the election. Most important of all he admitted that they blew the story.
Social Media and Politics
Previously politicos and gamblers would use traditional media as a handicapping resource. But the stubborn defiance of the media to consider new election factors continues into 2020. As a result, more people are using the internet and social media to get alternative points of view. In the same way as sports, Political Betting requires a contrarian approach. Especially in dealing with “journalists” that are actually advocates for a particular side. Indeed 2016 showed that “news” is actually an infomercial for particular points of view.
Glenn Thrush
Glenn Thrush is a great example of this bias. At the onset of 2016 he was in the tank for Hillary Clinton. In fact, WikiLeaks revealed that Thrush referred to himself a “hack” to a Clinton campaign advisor. Supplementing that was his checking with the Clinton campaign to approve his stories. Extending the deceit was that he presented himself as a Politico “journalist” to the public. For this reason, it’s astounding that the New York Times knowingly hired Thrush after this came to light. In view of this how can gamblers trust such sources for accurate information?
Maggie Haberman
In like manner was the Times hiring Maggie Haberman. As an illustration Haberman was well known for her willingness to “tee up” favorable Clinton stories. Above all she developed the reputation for being a Clinton campaign stenographer. While masquerading as an “objective journalist” at Politico. From this point gamblers have learned to avoid the New York Times if they want to know what is actually happening with the electorate.
Conventional Wisdom
Starting with “conventional wisdom” there are stark relations between sports and Political Betting. Concurrently just consider how many times sports pundits blow picks. Certainly, it happens all the time. So too have we learned that it happens in politics as well. Starting with insider pundits, gamblers learned an old adage. To illuminate, political commentators are so deep in the forest that they can’t see the trees. Simultaneously all of the mea culpas after the fact illustrated this truth. Such as that is the case gamblers must be extra careful about their sources.
All about the Polls
Polling has become a new and difficult art for the political world. Owing to cell phones and new technology old polling methods are no longer valid. The 2016 election revealed how so called “expert” pollsters totally botched their metrics. To bring to light Clinton was lured into the trap of using the metrics of Barack Obama. What’s more this ignored unique polling dynamics and demographic differences in support. Alternatively, Obama had more intense support than Clinton could muster.
Media Bias
In comparison to sports the one factor that handicappers cannot underestimate enough is media bias. By contrast to real Americans, the vast majority of the “news” media come from one point of view. As a matter of fact, it has proven to be an echo chamber. Along the same lines original independent thought is rare. Supplementing that are surveys showing most “journalists” are actually Democrat activists. Thus the “reporting” and “news” contains such biases. As a consequence, a lot of people were blinded to Trump’s potential. In particular only those seeking out alternative media on the internet saw the possibility.
SBG and Politics
SBG will offer the best in 2020 Presidential gambling. More emphatically there will be countless factors to consider. Likewise, gamblers learned in 2016 that there are no actual “reliable sources” to lean on for handicapping. Summing up those who get to know the American people will stand the best chance of picking the 2020 winner. After all it is they and not the pundits who make the final decision.