• Betting Odds On Democratic Primary Debate
• Betting Odds On Democratic Primary Turnout

1. Online sportsbook Bovada has released the 2024 Democratic nominee odds with Biden sitting as the +250 favorite.
2. Mar 09, 2019 2020 Democratic Nominee Betting Odds By Ronald Black on March 9, 2019 In July 2020, the Democratic Party will choose a candidate to represent them in the Presidential Election, presumably against the incumbent Donald Trump.
3. The 2020 South Carolina Primary: Betting Odds & Suggested Picks by Isaiah Sirois February 27, 2020 The race to represent the Democratic Party against President Donald Trump heads south this week, as voters in South Carolina will go to the polls on Saturday, February 29th.

GOP Nomination 2024 GOP Nominee for the Presidential election to be held on Nov 5 2024. $4,236,101 bet so far. Odds update every minute Last updated: 11:14PM EDT on Aug 18, 2020. Election Betting Odds. By Maxim Lott and John Stossel. Why This Beats Polls. Democratic Nominee.

In July 2020, the Democratic Party will choose a candidate to represent them in the Presidential Election, presumably against the incumbent Donald Trump. If they’re somehow able to get him out of office before then, that’d be a big win for the left which would drastically alter the stakes and tone of the primaries.

As it stands, with the President in office as expected, a central theme in choosing a ticket worthy of taking over the White House will be, “Who can beat Trump?”

Considering the current state of the Democrats, with the old guard butting heads with the rise of the Progressives, the answer to that question may not be the same as “Who can win these Democratic primaries?” We’ve seen the party’s power structure misdiagnose how to defeat the controversial Republican incumbent before.

Whichever challenger emerges will have first to defeat a sizable field. With an influx of young progressive candidates mixed with some establishment figures and the return of Bernie Sanders, the 2020 Democratic Primary promises to be some grade-A political drama. Let’s find some solid gambling value to make it profitable as well.

Finding the Perfect Opponent for Trump

For the better part of four years now, the political establishment in both parties has been generally baffled by Donald Trump’s winning 2016 campaign. The victory now appears to be part of a broader global populist trend that may give us some insight into how 2020’s festivities will play out as well.

Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of it all is that the left still doesn’t seem to comprehend what went wrong in the first place. And yelling about Russia for Republican two years now hasn’t done much to impact Trump and his now-dug-in base.

For the Democrats to steal back the White House, they need to find a way to attract all of those so-called “Bernie Bros” that abandoned the party after feeling robbed in the 2016 primaries by Hillary Clinton and the establishment party officials.

And how much are they willing to sacrifice to win those voters anyway? Will the Dems be ready to surrender control to the growing Progressive wing of the party that can tap into some of that Sanders’ magic? Or, will they try to sneak-in an establishment figure, hoping to do just enough to scoop up the handful of Bernie’s fans they need for the electoral?

Howard Schultz

One wildcard out there, who may end up playing a crucial role in deciding which Democratic candidate is “electable” is the entrepreneur and two-time Starbucks Chairman and CEO — Howard Schultz. The coffee magnate has been threatening to run as an independent if some of the more socialist voices on the left come into power.

I use the term “threat” because the widespread fear in left-leaning circles is that his “socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative” message will pull more support away from the Democratic nominee than it will from Trump on election day. Immediately upon announcing his intentions to run, some of the louder and more prominent voices on the left began to directly and aggressively attack Schultz – going so far as to call for boycotts of Starbucks.

So, Howard will be hanging over everyone’s head during the primaries. “Electability” is already a hot topic amongst the Dems, and one of the primary concerns that seem to come up when discussing candidates like Harris, Gabbert, O’Rourke, and Sanders.

If the party truly believes any Progressive nominee will prompt his entry into the race – thus, splitting the left’s vote and handing the Presidency to Trump – they may feel more inclined to push “safer” insiders like Joe Biden.

However, I’m not sure the Democrats are correct in their assertion that Schultz running would hurt their chances at taking the White House. I suspect they’re drastically underrating how many votes his message could steal away from Trump and overrating how many Dems would be tempted to go outside the party.

Regardless, nothing I’ve seen from the movers-and-shakers on the left tells me that they understand or know how to combat Trump. Their fear of Schultz makes this abundantly apparent.

Voting Blocs

The political types behind the scenes like to break voters down into specific blocs who they then tailor specific messages towards. Last election, Hillary’s people focused on the Democratic loyalists, Hispanics, and the Black vote while ignoring the younger and further left-leaning voices.

Well, the traditional analysts and part members believe the “Bernie Bros” were more “left-leaning” or socialist anyway – I’m not so sure they’ve got that part right.

I’ve seen countless articles, videos, and interviews discussing Bernie Sanders’ 2016 run and why so many of his supporters refused to cast their vote for Hillary after her team and the Democratic Party successfully stole the primaries.

The left loves to blame this group of voters for being racist or sexist or for having been fooled by Russian operatives. For the most part, this is all BS, and remarkably tone-deaf. They really can’t see how fed-up people are, and for that reason, they are in denial of the “Outsider” voting bloc.

For example, even FiveThirtyEight.com — probably the most reliable mainstream political analysts around these days – broke the five Democratic voting blocs down like so:

1. Party Loyalists
2. The Left
3. Millennials and Friends
4. Black Voters
5. Hispanic and Asian Voters

In a recent article about these different groups, Nate Silver highlights a candidate’s job to capture a coalition of voters from as many of these blocs as possible. That part’s obvious, but I don’t think he’s defining these various sub-sections of the party accurately – at least in a couple of cases.

Silver mentions throughout the article how a large number of “the Left” didn’t make the jump from Sanders to Hillary, believing these more Progressive voters either stayed home or went with a third-party candidate. He also mentions how the younger members of the “Millennials and Friends” and Black voters were turned off from Hillary as well.

If I were breaking down the Democratic masses to best design a campaign, I think my categories would look something closer to this:

1. Party Loyalists
2. Progressives / Far Left
3. Outsiders / Idealists
4. Students
5. Identity Groups

It’s that third group that I suspect elected Donald Trump. Of the 26% of Bernie Bros who didn’t cast a vote for Hillary, 12% threw their support behind the current President. What that figure doesn’t account for are all the similarly-minded citizens who may not have been given the option to participate in the primaries or who are registered Republicans.

A massive portion of Sanders’s supporters wasn’t so passionately behind him because they love socialism and higher taxed; they thought he was honest and discussing ideas that most career politicians won’t touch. They want to hear people talking truthfully about campaign finance reform, taxes on the rich, and how our government seems to solely exist for the benefit of massive international corporations.

If you’re a Democrat, you probably just muttered something along the lines of, “well, if they wanted honesty how could they vote for the biggest lying, stealing, sexist, racist, person to ever live?!?” Easy.

After watching the candidate they loved cheated out of the race by the establishment, they decided that any outsider would do. Maybe Trump is a bad guy, but they’d rather throw that human Molotov cocktail at Capitol Hill – the guy who doesn’t look or sound like any of the “real” politicians – than settle for yet another member of the political elite.

It wasn’t that they didn’t want a woman president. It wasn’t that they were racist. They weren’t even fooled and manipulated by the Russian boogeymen. They want actual change, and I suspect they’ll be looking for it again this year – from someone other than Bernie. More on that later.

Game-Changing Scenarios

I’m writing this article way too early; so much is going to happen between now and those first few primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire. Some of the front-runners we’re looking at as legit contenders right now won’t even make it on the first ballots. Scandals will arise, campaigns will make fatal tactical errors, there will be debate flubs, and a long-shot or two will significantly outperform early projections.

More than anything: Deals will be made. Not everybody that has announced their intention to run wants to be President. More than a handful are hoping to parlay a 2020 campaign into greater prominence on the national stage, negotiate an appointment for themselves, or attach themselves to the ticket.

Looking at the pool of candidates, there are some exciting combinations if a few of the favorites are open to being the Vice President. If the primaries are a close-fought and bitter battle to the end, the Democrats don’t have a prayer of beating Trump in November 2020. But, if a team or two forms early, and we get the right arrangement of options, the left might end their four-year nightmare after-all.

For instance, I think Joe Bidden will need a VP that the party can sell to Bernie Bros. That means it’ll have to be someone progressive that can retain enough of them without causing too much of a fuss for the pro-war, corporatist, establishment Dems.

Maybe an Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or Corey Booker – progressives who may be willing to compromise their ideas to advance their careers, but are still trusted by most of the far left.

All of the progressive candidates could become a serious presidential contender if anyone could talk Bernie into playing a sort of “sage mentor” role as their Vice President. Whether he backed Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, or someone like Beto O’Rourke, that candidate would immediately re-ignite the passion Sanders’s 2016 run inspired – something I don’t think he can do again on his own.

Similarly, it’s fathomable that Bernie Sanders will talk one of the other candidates into being his VP and announcing the formation fairly early-on. He’ll probably need someone closer to center if he wants the Democratic machine to get out of his way and bless the nomination; Tim Ryan, Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, and Amy Klobuchar are all decent choices.

Any of these big-name candidates either combining as a ticket or throwing their support behind one of their opponents could ultimately decide the Democratic Primary. Having to predict the most likely scenarios are undoubtedly a challenge, but that’s why these futures bets from so far out pay so well.

The Major Players

Bernie Sanders (+900)

Bernie Sanders’s 2016 bid to be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States changed the party for the foreseeable future. He popularized socialism in a way other progressive politicians — like Elizabeth Warren, for example — had yet to do, leading to a new more aggressively liberal movement within the ranks of the Dems.

Approaching 2020, the party has had to move further left – with a whole lot’a candidates running without corporate donors or SuperPAC money, while openly discussing things like Medicare-for-all, taxing the wealthy, free college, and other anxiety-inducing topics for billionaires.

Considering he was so close to winning the nomination last time, you’d think a +900-betting line would be appealing; but I’m staying far away. It’s impossible to quantify, but I’d guess a decent amount of the intensity around Bernie had to do with who he opposed.

Against Hillary Clinton, the contrast was severe. With enormous swathes of the country having never recovered from the 2008 financial collapse, people are getting tired of the usual “promise you everything, then sell everyone out to corporate and monied interests” politicians who dominate the upper echelons of power in the States.

A candidate came along that wanted to make a few decisions that would actually benefit the regular people, and everybody flipped. All he had to do was be straightforward about corporations and Wall Street, and not be her, and he was golden.

Now, the people at the top – in both parties – obviously don’t want to change the system to the extent that some of these progressives are talking. But they also can’t be too apparent in showing the citizens that they’re not going to be allowed to make any of the changes being discussed.

Bernie was cheated at every turn in 2016, which backfired. For 2020, the party bosses are either more prepared or way luckier. Instead of facing a single pro-big pharma/war/banker/corporation, establishment Democrat, they’ve compiled a field that effectively eliminates every advantage he had.

Only Joe Biden can be attacked in the same manner as Clinton was in 2016; the rest of his significant competitors are his own creation, in a sense. The field of viable progressive candidates includes Tulsi Gabbard, Sherrod Brown, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Beto O’Rourke — as well as establishment-Dems-in-progressive-clothing, like Corey Booker.

Sanders already struggled to capture the black vote – which ended up being the difference in last election’s primaries. He does well with the younger voters in minority blocs, but not the older members. Harris and Booker will likely take a sizable portion of his supporters in these camps.

Tulsi Gabbard will be able to outflank Bernie to the left. I suspect she will paint him as a sellout, using the candidate’s Venezuela opinions as proof. Beto represents a younger, less grumpy image of progressivism and is the only Democrat with the Obama-like potential to show up and blitzkrieg the entire field for the nomination out of nowhere.

Then there’s Elizabeth Warren. Warren has been sharing a similar message as Sanders for years now, but like 60% of Democratic voters, she’s a woman. The perfect compromise between Hillary and Bernie, in a weird way. What makes Elizabeth uniquely dangerous is that she’s writing and presenting actual policies to go along with her campaign.

Instead of merely mentioning a tax plan, for example, she’s drawing up the details and releasing them to the public. This forces her opponents to do the same. When you’re promising some of the things Bernie may need to – especially if forced to “out-liberal” some of his competition – it becomes much more challenging when you’re forced to create concrete written proposals to go along with them.

Not only do I not see Bernie recreating 2016’s success, I think he puts an end to campaign after Super Tuesday. Hopefully, he can then join another ticket as VP – although, I doubt that’s an option in his mind.

Joe Biden (+500)

I’m just going to tell you right now; at +500, I absolutely love this line and will 100% be taking heavy action on these odds. If the field of candidates stays as large as expected and continues to include multiple far-left (relative to typical US politics) options to compete with Bernie, Joe can slide into this nomination without being anyone’s first choice.

In fact, polls shared by FiveThirtyEight.com show that no matter who a voter’s first choice may be, either Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders are always their second favorite. As the horde of progressives cannibalize themselves – or force each other so far left that it freaks out the Democratic base — Biden has an ideal opportunity to steal this thing.

He has the Obama recommendation, which – as a white male – may make him more palatable to minority voters (though the party may not worry as much about them, assuming anti-Trump sentiments are enough). Besides his experience as VP, I also think Joe benefits from having gone away and not run the last election. Now, voters who miss the Obama days will see Biden as a welcome return to those days.

Most importantly, the former Vice President has the entire establishment Democratic machine behind him. That’s a massive advantage, especially concerning fund-raising.

Kamala Harris (+300)

Kamala Harris is one of the favorites to win the nomination this far out. At +300 odds, she presents the worst betting value among the real contenders. While she checks off some fairly significant boxes, I also see a few red flags that could sabotage her campaign within the exact voting blocs to which she appeals.

For example, she’s a mixed-race minority woman. There’s a sizable piece of the Democratic voters that will feel a strong connection to her. But what percentage of those blocs will look past the way she had parents arrested and prosecuted for their children’s truancy. How many low-income single mothers would be disproportionately impacted by such a policy?

There are other votes and comments throughout her political career that will cause similar controversies. In San Francisco, she backed legislation that resulted in ICE being notified whenever undocumented juveniles were arrested, for instance.

She’s also been caught in lies trying to appeal to younger voters and minorities. Harris claimed to smoke weed in college, which seems inconsistent with her morals as a tough-on-crime prosecutor. She went further by saying she liked listening to Tupac or Snoop Dogg when this supposed smoking happened, despite graduating from law school in 1989 before either of them had ever released an album.

Harris doesn’t have the name to take the establishment vote away from Biden and doesn’t have the record to hold off the Progressive movement. I see her as a prime candidate for a cabinet position, however; possibly even as the Vice President.

Elizabeth Warren (+800)

Elizabeth Warren isn’t expected to make too much noise as a Presidential candidate in 2020, but I see some serious spoiler potential in her. Of all the candidates in the Democratic primaries, she’s the only choice on which I’ve already placed a bet. Warren may seem too liberal in her policies to win-it-all on the surface, but I think she has shown a willingness to compromise and play the game in a way that won’t give the establishment elite too much pause.

If Elizabeth can’t make the necessary waves alone, she’d make a game-changing addition to another candidate’s ticket. Such a skillful policy-maker is going to play a central role in deciding the nomination, whether she makes it to the convention or not.

Corey Booker (+1200)

There’s no result that would shock me with regards to Corey Booker in 2020. A career-ending scandal seems every bit as within the realm of possibility as the Presidential nomination, which is probably the sign of a great politician. Booker has the charisma and looks, plus a valuable slate of endorsements from other Democrats backing his nomination.

If there’s anything that could derail the New Jersey Senator, it’s his connection to unpopular big money lobbies. Senator Booker is lumping himself in with the progressives for this run, but his financial ties to Big Pharma, Wall Street, and the banks should blow up in his face before Super Tuesday.

Which gets to the heart of the matter that the Democrats are facing. With the influx of Bernie socialists making noise in the party, some of their most electable candidates aren’t far left enough to win the primaries. But the candidates that can inspire the Bernie Bros to come out again in full force aren’t as likely to perform well in the general election.

Still, at +1200 odds, this is too good a bet to pass up. Corey Booker may not be the favorite, but he has the right skills, comes from an advantageous state, and has the right connections to surprise some people and make a run at the White House.

Tulsi Gabbard (+900)

In early-2019, including Tulsi Gabbard in the” Major Players” section will be seen as absurd. Since her announcement, she’s been tagged as the newest “Russian shill” for having the nerve to visit Syria and inspect the situation for herself.

Well, it’s not that she went to Syria, it’s that she came back and told the US that they’re leaders were actually arming the terrorists over there, and it was them – not Assad – who are destroying the country and committing human rights violations.

Today, just about every American will tell you that going into Iraq was a mistake and many will claim to have known so all along; but dare to denounce one of these occupations when it’s getting ramped up or about to start and your fellow citizens will tear you to pieces as a traitor, sympathizer, or worse.

So, now she’s part of the neo-McCarthyist “Russian Agenda” despite being the only candidate from either party who actually served in our nation’s armed forces. Tulsi will never be allowed to run for president.

She’s already under attack from the talking heads owned by the military-industrial sector, the Israeli lobby, and the bankers/elite — plus their hordes of online minions. We’re even seeing Facebook arbitrarily delete her campaign posts and obstruct people sharing them. Only Trump has ever been able to overcome this amount of pressure – and he might have gotten a little help.

The very fact that Tulsi can’t win and will be mistreated along the way is precisely why I think she’ll be this year’s Bernie Sanders. She is stating some honest, unpopular facts about how this country conducts its foreign policy. Facts that make you unelectable in the current system, but inspire those Outsider voters who were drawn to 2008-Obama, 2012-Ron Paul, 2016-Bernie Sanders, and in some cases – Donald Trump.

Look for Gabbard to significantly outperform her early polling numbers, finishing in third or fourth in those first two or three primaries. I see her calling out Bernie Sanders – and the other Progressives – for comments seemingly in support of intervention in Venezuela.

When she highlights all of the ways in which it’s the same as Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq, Bernie will likely be seen as compromised by his conspiracy-fearing base. Tulsi becomes the trusted truth-teller from that point on.

From there, the momentum builds, more money comes in, and the party officials turn to shadier and shadier tactics to derail the candidate. They better be more subtle in 2020 or those Outsiders will flee to Trump — in even larger numbers this time — out of spite,

The Interesting Long-Shots

Beto O’Rourke (+350)

Betting Odds On Democratic Primary Debate

If my prediction about Tulsi Gabbard becoming this year’s Bernie Sanders is off, it’ll be because Beto O’Rourke took up the mantle instead. The Texas congressman is still deciding whether to challenge for Republican Senator John Cornyn’s senate seat or the Democratic presidential nomination, but he’ll probably announce in the near future.

Personally, I’d like to see O’Rourke run for the Senate seat and delay entering the presidential race for now. The Democratic field is too crowded and the party too divided at the moment to realistically mount the challenge that a politician this special deserves.

The Spanish-speaking congressman will draw tons of support from the Hispanic community whenever he does run. However, Trump’s wall and general attitude towards Mexico has already given the Democrats the Latino vote. So, why waste one of his more significant advantages on a candidate against whom it’s not needed?

Of course, he does have that rare Obama-like magic that could separate him from the other Dems if he wants to go for it all this early. It wasn’t enough to steal Ted Cruz’s seat during the 2018 mid-terms, but Beto’s star has only risen since then.

Regardless, +350 isn’t a great line for an outsider candidate. This is a politician who doesn’t take corporate donors or PAC money; they’re always going to face an uphill battle to the White House. At +800 or so, I’d be much more excited about betting Beto.

Amy Klobuchar (+1000)

Betting Odds On Democratic Primary Turnout

Amy Klobuchar looks like a viable candidate on paper, but she’s going to have a rough primary. The Senator is from Minnesota, a state the Democrats desperately need to protect, in a region that the Republicans very recently stole from the left. She’s also made a career of pulling support from both the left and right, which makes her appealing as well.

However, she’s going to run into some possibly sexist tropes that may hurt her standing with progressives. Klobuchar has a reputation for being an exceptionally cruel boss to staffers. Worse, this can be substantiated by her having the highest staff turnover of almost any Senator in Washington.

Furthermore, the Minnesota Senator is a bit more hesitant to accept some of the more radical ideas coming from the left, such as the Green New Deal. While I think her centrist sensibilities may serve her well in the general election, I don’t see how she pulls away from the pack in the primaries.

Sherrod Brown (+1100)

Sherrod Brown is leaning towards throwing his hat into the ring, but I don’t think he’s a real threat to win the White House. If the bookmakers would offer such odds, I’d love to bet on the Ohio senator either being tapped as the eventual Vice-Presidential nominee. He can carry an immensely important state for his ticket, so he’ll be a player in these elections, even if he’s not top billing.

Julian Castro (+2000)

Julian Castro will eventually make an excellent candidate, but 2020 isn’t the year. As the former secretary of Housing and Urban Development, he has some vital experience to draw from and a tacit endorsement from Obama, who appointed him.

Although, you have to wonder if all the new Cold War Russia stuff that’s getting dredged back up in the public consciousness if Castro’s last name will remind people of the Cuban missile crisis. I mean – it’s completely absurd, but so is the American public. They’ve been chasing Russians in their dreams for a couple of years now, so anything is possible.

Hillary Clinton (+1600)

At +1600 odds, you have to put a couple of bucks on Hillary Clinton, just in case. So far, Clinton has said she’s not running, but I’m not buying it. Should she decide to take one last shot at the White House, it’ll be much later in the primaries – and only if there isn’t a viable Democrat, that’s pulling away from the rest. At this age, she won’t want another tense primary wearing her out before dealing with Trump.

Seriously though, who has more shady connections and support from high places than Hillary Clinton? I recently watched a video on her body language and came away convinced that she’s gearing up for a rematch. Her team just needs things to break the right way in the early states. If Biden stumbles early, it drastically improves the odds of Clinton showing up.

Favorite 2020 Democratic Primary Wagers

Again, It’s way too early to know with any certainty how the Democratic primaries will eventually play out. There are so many moving pieces at this stage in the game and so many variables that could change the entire race in an instant. Trump could be impeached or primaried; scandals could erupt, and deals will be made that change the complexion of the field of candidates.

With what limited information we currently have and considering the opinions I’ve shared above, here are my favorite wagers for the 2020 Democratic primaries:

• Joe Biden: $200 @ +500 to win $1000
• Elizabeth Warren: $100 @ +800 to win $800
• Corey Booker: $50 @ +1200 to win $600
• Hillary Clinton: $50 @ +1600 to win $800

If you enjoy this kind of political betting and have an interest in profiting from your political predictions, you should check out the gambling sites listed below. These locations offer the best political and entertainment-based odds anywhere on the web: