As at 05/4/16

I shall update about weekly

http://www.oddschecker.com.au/politics/australian-politics/australian-federal-election/winning-party

---

Not bad odds for labor. Might jump on one of those

Greens are you ..... oh never mind

This thread should also track the hung Parliament odds.

Could someone explain those figures to me I am not a Bogan punter.

Malcolm has shown himself to be a 'validation chasing, weak beta male'
this is very female behaviour, or beta male behaviour.

It is the equivalent of going up to people, putting on a 'dancing monkey " routine and then asking (with big puppy dog eyes)  "Do you like me yet"

usually people are repulsed by such low status behaviour.

the voter responds to the alpha male who will "treat them mean and keep them keen" Malcolm is too beta

Scott Morrison should be made leader and he should deliver the following speech in a very stern and authoratative voice

"the days of pandering to you, the voter, are over.
You will work harder, you will have less services, we will reward the cream, we will ensure that the lazy, the wicked, the complainers, the leaners and the non contributors are made to feel the full wrath of the government.
you will learn to respect our leadership and you will learn to all pull together for the good of australia.
those attempting to 'white ant' the nations prosperity will be hunted down and ruthlessly exposed as the traitors they are.
my first act as PM will be to close the ABC and replace it with a channel devoted to telling the  wonderful success stories of our movers shakers and innovators.
this channel will be run by Andrew Bolt under the tutelage of Rupert.
have a nice day

Honest Joe wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 11:47pm:

Not bad odds for labor. Might jump on one of those

Yeah, $100 bucks @ $4.50.

If they win it's a 350% earn............and if they lose......$100 is well worth it.... ;D ;D

miketrees wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 7:32am:

Could someone explain those figures to me I am not a Bogan punter.

The betting agencies already hold a lot of money for a Coalition win.

Swagman wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 8:07am:

Honest Joe wrote on Apr 5th, 2016 at 11:47pm: Not bad odds for labor. Might jump on one of those Yeah, $100 bucks @ $4.50. If they win it's a 350% earn............and if they lose......$100 is well worth it.... ;D ;D

Good One!   ;D ;D ;D ;D

Bam wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 8:36am:

miketrees wrote on Apr 6th, 2016 at 7:32am: Could someone explain those figures to me I am not a Bogan punter. The betting agencies already hold a lot of money for a Coalition win.

...will they be donating lots of cash to the Labor party?  :D

Bam wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 8:36am:

miketrees wrote on Apr 6th, 2016 at 7:32am: Could someone explain those figures to me I am not a Bogan punter. The betting agencies already hold a lot of money for a Coalition win.

All those property developers trying to double up so they can slip some donations through the back door

Labor's in to $4.20 on Sportsbet

miketrees wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 7:32am:

Could someone explain those figures to me I am not a Bogan punter.

The figure represents what you would be paid per $1 invested

1.5 = $1.50

Does that mean the Greens are at 251?

I get it now.

miketrees wrote on Apr 6^th, 2016 at 7:19pm:

Does that mean the Greens are at 251? I get it now.

I think I would not bother with that one!

Unless all the Coalition and Labor folks die in a bombing at parliament house

Even then I suspect a drovers dog party to use a bill Hayden term would beat them.

No significant change

---

gee wizz - Labor is only at 3.75 to 1.

I thought the polls were running neck & neck?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2016 at 8:54am:

gee wizz - Labor is only at 3.75 to 1. I thought the polls were running neck & neck?

The opinion polls are, yes. Betting odds are different. They are not an accurate reflection of the actual chance of winning the election because the betting agency may already be holding a substantial amount of money for a Coalition election win. They will lower the Coalition's odds to discourage further bets on the Coalition (and increase Labor's odds correspondingly).

Bam wrote on Apr 16^th, 2016 at 9:13am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 16th, 2016 at 8:54am: gee wizz - Labor is only at 3.75 to 1. I thought the polls were running neck & neck? The opinion polls are, yes. Betting odds are different. They are not an accurate reflection of the actual chance of winning the election because the betting agency may already be holding a substantial amount of money for a Coalition election win. They will lower the Coalition's odds to discourage further bets on the Coalition (and increase Labor's odds correspondingly).

You have summed it up pretty well, its a growing pot of money where the odds are moved to encourage the punters to bet. Is not a real guide to who people at large will vote for although polls will obviously influence the odds

The way the libs are going in a few months time it will be close to a dollar for labor :D LOL

What was longprong58 saying about 20 to 1 for labor :D LOL

Was 5.40 less than a month ago  :) Oh how your signature will haunt you for eternity Armpit

Are there fixed odds?

Labor cant win with Bill.

He's a bit like Kim Beezley.

The electorate pay very little attention and they will tend to go with the bloke who gives off the better vibe.

Beezley and Shorten both give off that "low status " vibe.  They both give off very low quality "masculine energy".  They seem unsure of themselves. They are a bit whiney.  They dont seem to have that cocky confident edginess that a hawke or a keating had.

This is death to a leader.  women wont vote for a beta male and Bill is quite beta.

I cant see they have an obvious replacement. The whole labor party seems a celebration of emotional insecurity and negative neurotic thinking.

Til the next hawke or keating comes along, labor are destined to remain in opposition.

Female voters want an alpha male.
They all get on their knees for the champ .

Sucking up to the electorate (as Bill does) just makes him look weak