|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
Also this issue: The Thespian Club The Bell Curve |
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||||
May 16-22, 2002
guvwatch
You’re a regular voter and a conscientious citizen. You’ve studied the candidates and carefully researched the issues, but still find yourself on the political fence. What do you do now? Go with the odds. It’s not just for sports betting anymore.
You can lay odds on anything these days, including political races. Ron Faucheux, editor in chief of Campaigns and Elections magazine, calls himself "The Political Oddsmaker." The Washington, D.C.-based publication handicaps politics the same way sports bookies handicap football and baseball games. He also works with oddsmakers and handicappers in Las Vegas, using his knowledge of percentages and averages. And for the Pennsylvania governor's race, Faucheux has come up with the line.
It's Rendell over Casey, 11 to 10, which means that an $11 dollar bet on Rendell will get you $10 if he wins. The probability of a Rendell victory, according to Faucheux, is 52.4 percent. Not long odds, by any means, but hey, it's a close race. Faucheux patiently explains how he gets the numbers.
"The odds are basically an accumulation of polling data, and numerous talks with voters, campaign consultants, observers and insiders in the race," he says. "We picked Rendell, but the slim margin reflects his dependence on a high turnout in Philadelphia and the surrounding counties. We felt from the beginning that Rendell had the potential to mount a winning campaign, despite Casey's early advantage. Casey, of course, had the name recognition because of his father being a beloved governor. It just seemed to us that Rendell pulled it out in the end. The tide only turned a week or two ago."
This seems like a good time to ask a professional oddsmaker what effect negative campaigning has on a race, as well as whether going negative increases or decreases the odds of winning.
"Voters like to complain about being sick of negative campaigning, but what they're really complaining about is anything that's overstated or factually inaccurate or incomplete, which is usually the case when campaigns go negative," Faucheux says. "After a while, the average voter just can't keep up with the charges and counter-charges, and just wish both candidates would shut up and run. But voters are generally pretty savvy and are much better informed on the issues than one might think. What voters are really looking for is a candidate who fits their agenda and most closely reflects their viewpoints. That's the reason campaigns go negative-- so that the candidate can clearly distinguish himself from his opponent. The easiest way to do that is to call your opponent a liar and a rascal," he says, laughing. "Sometimes the liar wins and sometimes the rascal wins."
According to Faucheux's website, www.campaignline.com, he's made more than 1,500 picks nationwide since 1996, with an accuracy of 98 percent. OK, so it's not the most scientific method of choosing a candidate or the most civic-minded way to make a choice, but what do you want for 11 bucks?
