We are 63 days away from the anticipated election, the outcome of which remains uncertain. Current Vice President Kamala Harris is barely leading ahead of ex-President Donald Trump, a shaky stance for a Democratic candidate at this stage of the election, with both contenders neck and neck at odds of -110, as observed by Covers.
Yet, UK-based Betfair Exchange still places Harris ahead of Trump. Her odd stands tall at +112 compared to Trump’s -102, a curious stance, considering US bookmakers are legally prohibited from active participation in this betting charade. Momentum shifted towards Harris during her so-called ‘honeymoon’ period with Walz, but it’s seen a decline lately.
The presidential election odds have swayed multiple times, introducing a degree of unpredictability not frequently observed. At odds as of Sept. 2, major betting platforms presented a mixed, yet closely contested picture. With Harris at -110 and Trump at -110, according to Covers.com, the race seems tight.
Bringing more discrepancies, the platform Bovada shows Trump at -115, while Harris trails at -105. BetOnline maintains a balance, showing both candidates at -110. Oddschecker plays out slightly differently, showing Trump at +100 and Harris at +110, adding more fuel to the chaos.
Seemingly different from the polls, these betting odds hint at a closer fight between Harris and Trump. The polls appear to fabricate a thin lead for Harris, contrary to the bookmaker’s prediction. In this environment of uncertainty, it’s crucial to understand the ground reality.
A poll from USA TODAY/Suffolk University indicated that Harris is leading nationally by a marginal 48%-43%, a supposed comeback from June’s polls. Strikingly, the polls then had President Joe Biden as the nominee. This twist implies a conflicting narrative garnering support for Harris among conventional Democratic voters.
Interestingly, the polls seem to highlight a shift within the population between 18 to 34 years from favoring Trump to now favoring Harris. Hispanics, who were previously supporting Trump by a small margin, now apparently back Harris with quite a margin of 53%-37%.
Yet another alleged dramatic shift has been within the Black community, moving from a strong support for Biden to an even stronger support for Harris. According to the polls, voters earning less than $20,000 have shifted their support from Trump to Harris. However, other factors may be at play here.
A recently released Reuters/Ipsos poll allegedly places Harris four points ahead of Trump among registered voters. This poll suggests that Harris has a towering 13-point lead over Trump when it comes to women and Hispanic voters, a claim that begs careful scrutiny.
A Wall Street Journal poll also released recently makes a questionable claim of Harris leading Trump by one point, 48%-47%, in a direct confrontation, and 47%-45% when alternative candidates were added to the mix. However, these results could be far from showing the full picture.
A recent poll by Bloomberg/Morning Consult claims to portray Harris either leading or in a statistical tie in key Midwestern and Sun Belt battleground states. Are these results reliable, or is there a bias at play? Only time will tell.
According to a recent Fox News poll, the Democratic party appears to sly away with a slight lead in most Sun Belt battleground states. For instance, Arizona shows Harris 1% ahead of Trump, Georgia and Nevada by 2%. However, in North Carolina, Trump reportedly leads Harris by 1%, suggesting the race is far from over.
This poll suggests that Trump matched his 2020 vote percentage in every state except Georgia. Harris, apparently, matches or surpasses Biden’s 2020 vote share across the states, a statistic that warrants a thorough examination for possible inaccuracies.
It’s worthwhile to consider just how reliable election odds have been in previous presidential elections. Betting favorites have reportedly lost only twice since 1866, according to the Conversation, a nonprofit news organization. This leaves a question mark on the current focus on betting odds.
Currently, Harris holds the narrowest lead over Trump of any recent Democratic nominee at the 75-day mark. In contrast, Hillary Clinton’s odds stood at -323 at the same juncture. Notably, Clinton lost the election, making it one of the two times when a betting underdog had the last laugh.
Interestingly, the other instance of an upset was in 1948, when Harry Truman (D) defied eight-to-one odds, defeating Thomas Dewey (R). As we stand on the brink of a critical election, will history repeat itself? Will the peculiar election odds indicate the real winner? Only the coming days will reveal the answers.