The odds may be long, but those who set them give Mark Sanford a chance at a political future — and not only that, but a shot at the unthinkable:
Oddsmakers: Mark Sanford more likely to become president than McCain, Paul
Posted at 12:10 PM by Jeff Shaw
Beano Cook has mused that if you want to predict the future, go by what the oddsmakers in Vegas are saying. “Those guys live in nicer houses than we do,” I’d hear Beano say often on my local sports radio shows.
Strictly for research purposes, I took a gander at what the online wagering site BetUs is saying about the 2012 presidential election. The site is offering futures bets on the outcome of Nov. 2012’s balloting, and while we’re a long way from that day, what the bookies think the most likely outcomes are is intriguing. Here’s a screen shot of the chart in case you don’t want to visit a gambling website.
For those of you unfamiliar with oddsmaking, a minus sign indicates a bet that will pay off at less than even money. Currently, Barack Obama is at -130, meaning he’s the favorite. And a pretty major favorite, too: betting $100 on Obama would only return $77.
The fact that a sitting president would be a big favorite at this stage of the game isn’t surprising. Some of the other results, though, merit an eyebrow raise or two….
* Mark Sanford is in the mix! Yes, he’s a longshot at +4000, but that puts him ahead of previous nominee John McCain and Internet favorite Ron Paul (both at +5000). Oddsmakers must feel like Americans love a good soulmate story — or haven’t tired of Appalachian Trail jokes.
Combine that with the disgusting talk of him opposing Lindsey Graham, and you have a dark vision of our future that might have caused Orwell to shudder.
To think of cold-bloodedly forecasting such a thing. If I ever doubted that gamblers were amoral, this should settle it.
Related Posts
So Sanford is truly He Who Must Not Be Named, risen from the ashes….
A Sanford-Graham matchup would be interesting just to see Graham contort his positions to make it seem like he’s more conservative than he really is. Why he might even stop calling people who oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants “racists”. And he might have to dumb down his approach to reach out to the sub-100 level IQ voters that his spokesman, Rick Quinn, said Lindsey doesn’t represent.
It’ll all come down to how much of the Obama agenda Graham supports over the next couple years. If he supports Obama too strongly and the economy doesn’t recover, Graham will be very vulnerable in this state.
What are these guys smoking? It sure ain’t legal…
I kind of hope that Mark Sanford does run against Graham. I think the Republican Party needs to have that discussion on compromise, pragmatism, and the use of extreme rhetoric.
Maybe a high profile challenge from Sanford would give that to us.
“he might have to dumb down his approach to reach out to the sub-100 level IQ voters that his spokesman, Rick Quinn, said Lindsey doesn’t represent.”
So, Sanford has staked out his claim to the dumb voters? I thought Andre had a lock on them.
Doug, you said,
“he might have to dumb down his approach to reach out to the sub-100 level IQ voters that his spokesman, Rick Quinn, said Lindsey doesn’t represent.”
Here’s what Rick Quinn actually said: “He’s a thinking person’s conservative. I expect him to do well among voters with IQ’s in triple digits.”
Doing well among people with higher IQs does not equate to “doesn’t represent” people with lower IQs.
I think Lindsey has shown he’s pretty fair minded even when it is not advantageous for him to be so. He represents everybody.
But mostly language is my pet peeve. Words matter.
@Scout
Yes, the words do matter. What Quinn was implying is that people who disagree with Lindsey are stupid.
He represents himself. He does not represent EVERYBODY. On certain issues he definitely does not represent the opinion of the majority of the voters.
Actually, he does represent everybody. So does Jim DeMint, as hard as he tries to make it look like he represents only the most rigidly ideological portion of the GOP. That’s the way the system works. Whatever they do, they represent us. Which means we have to choose carefully at election time.
I think what Quinn was implying was that people who aern’t as book smart may not understand Lindsey as well as other’s who are – there is a subtle difference between your interpretation and mine. I believe Lindsey sincerely tries to do what is in the best interest of South Carolinians, and that is what I mean by represents everybody. You clearly disagree and that is fine.
@scout
“book smart” has nothing to do with IQ. A below 100 IQ would select below average intelligence and is unrelated to education.
Lindsey thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room. That’s why he loves to perform for the cameras. It’s not an uncommon trait of career politicians.
@Doug, actually the point of traditional IQ tests are to predict which students perform best in traditional academic settings. They were developed to identify students with learning disabilities and needed extra help in traditional academic settings. So people with higher IQs tend to be people who take to book learning easier – they don’t have higher IQs because of education, they just have the type of brain to benefit from it more and so tend to be more “book smart” in the end. So having a higher IQ is often correlated with “book smartness”. Also, 100 is the mean of the test, but the average range is a standard deviation above and below the mean – or 85-115 – so technically a below 85 IQ would indicate below average intelligence, not below 100. (http://www.education.com/reference/article/iq-school-achievement/)
Lindsey doesn’t come across to me as thinking he’s the smartest guy in the room and loving to perform. Maybe he is/does, but I just don’t get that vibe. He comes across a bit too serious and low key to “love performing”. Maybe I just haven’t watched him in action enough.
Lindsey doesn’t THINK he’s the smartest guy in the room; he usually IS the smartest guy in the room. And I have met few politicians in my career about whom I’d say that. So it’s not, as Doug says, a “common trait.”
He’s certainly the hardest-working; he obviously pours considerable energy into mastering the particulars of any issue he speaks on.
@ Doug Ross—just because someone “does well with” a group does not imply he doesn’t do well with other groups, nor that other candidates would not also “do well with” the same group. RQ was saying that LG does well with smarter people. He may also do well with less smart people, but we do not have any information in that regard in the RQ quote. We also don’t know who else does or does not do well with smarter people.
@Kathryn
Sure.. sure.. it was NEVER meant as a slight of people who don’t agree with Senator Graham. No ma’am.
I guess you’re right. I would say Mark Sanford also does well with the above-triple-digit IQ people as well as those who rely on their own skills and motivation to get ahead. Not saying he doesn’t do well with the lazy and government-dependent… I’m just saying what I’m saying.
Scout’s smart!
DeMint may have intelligent supporters, but the narrowness of his ideological position would tend to argue against this. Sanford’s camp is a pretty disillusioned bunch at this point so I’ll refrain from commenting on them. As with Graham, however, Sanford was able to build a big tent – way back when.
Thank you Senator Graham for finally seeing the light on illegal immigration:
“Appearing on Fox News, Graham said children of illegal immigrants should not automatically be granted citizenship If born in the United States. Graham said eliminating birthright citizenship would help prevent another wave of immigration decades down the road.
“I don’t want another 20 million more 20 years from now,” Graham told Greta Von Susteren.
“They come here to have babies. They come here to drop a child – it’s called drop and leave…that attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.”
Graham also said any immigration bill should only take effect after the U.S. government secures its borders, and that illegal immigrants should have to learn English, pay a fine and would not be given preferential placement in the citizenship process.”
Read more: http://thestatecom.typepad.com/ygatoday/2010/07/graham-no-citizenship-for-illegal-immigrants-offspring.html#ixzz0v6BizW6v
I can imagine what Brad would have said if these statements came from Jim DeMint.
I’d say this: I’m very disappointed to hear the senator say that. And frankly, I’d be surprised if DeMint said something like that. I don’t expect that kind of language from either of them. Next time I talk to him, I’ll ask him about that.
And then I’ll say, are we sure that’s what he said and meant? Maybe Fox did a Breitbart on him.
No, I don’t really think they did. But a suspicion like that naturally springs to mind when I hear something that unlikely…
That’s funny. When I posted the story, my first thought was “I bet Brad will say ‘What Senator Graham MEANT to say was…'”
What’s wrong with what he proposed?
Crossing into the country illegally and having a child here shouldn’t offer you any type of advantage.
We need to remove all of the incentives that cause them to commit the initial illegal act and expect them to follow the process to either gain citizenship or get a legal work visa. It’s simple.
So where does that stop; erasing the citizenship of native-born people? Or should we have levels of citizenship? This is some pretty scary stuff.
So the DAR’s will be the last to turn off the lights on our Republic, I guess?
@ Doug
“We need to remove all of the incentives that cause them to commit the initial illegal act and expect them to follow the process to either gain citizenship or get a legal work visa. It’s simple.”
What if the incentives are the wretched conditions in their country of origin and what if the legitimate process is broken? Just asking. I don’t think it’s always that simple.
I guess Lindsey, Doug, and Co. are not strict constructionists, after all. It was clearly the intent of the drafters on the Constitution that people born on this soil have citizenship.
“Times have changed,” you say.
Okay, then let’s reconsider the well-regulated militia, etc…..