When you buy through affiliate links in our content, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Learn 
It’s an interesting time to be a gambler in the United States. The NFL just revved up, NBA is in the offing and the presidential election nears its home stretch.
TV news shows in the States are clogged up with all kinds of surveys designed to predict presidential election outcomes under myriad circumstances. With 50 states all bringing their own results to the table, it gets complicated.
But there are thoughts that the real way to predict the finish of a presidential election is to follow the money.
The money, of course, that is being put up by punters who believe they can outthink the bookies in terms of who will end up in the White House.
Though you can’t legally bet on election outcomes in the States (the same holds true for Academy Award winners), you can bet on the presidential election with offshore operators and in the UK.
Particularly, you can do it on the peer-to-peer wagering site Betfair.
As of September 22, they have Kamala Harris at 52.91 percent to win and Donald Trump at 45.87 percent. With that pick’em style situation, the site deems the outcome “too close to call.”
Nevertheless, people take it seriously enough that the election winner market by volume stands at some £70 million for this year’s showdown.
Newsweek reported that Harris’s election odds took a dip after an interview she did on CNN. It’s the sort of minutiae that gamblers love – whether they are in the election fray or hunting down NFL overlays – and some politicians view as cringe worthy.
“It really reduces elections to a horse race,” complained a US senator by the name of Jeff Merkley. “You’ve converted a competition about leadership and ideas and character into a competition about how do I make the most money.”
Well, yeah. That is what gambler’s like to do.
Everybody’s got an opinion about the election. And putting up money at an online betting site – even 20 bucks – is a good way of showing what side of the argument you truly are on. When cash is at stake, everything gets a little more serious.
And it works. Presidential election wagering dates back to 1868 in the United States. Since then, only two White House favorites pooched it.
Most recently, in 2016, Hillary Clinton, a 7-to-2 (-350) favorite, which gave her a 78 percent chance of taking the White House, lost to Donald Trump.
I had no money riding on that one, but the unexpected win by Trump was plenty annoying.
In terms of what happens this year, who knows.
Maybe, in light of the tightness, the ultimate move for Harris supporters is to bet on Trump to win. That way, if their woman comes in, they won’t mind losing the bet. And if Trump aces it, at least there will be financial satisfaction.
Whatever the case, I am waiting for the initiation of election-related prop bets. For instance: What is the over-under on how long after losing his White House bid will it be before Trump makes an accusation that the election was rigged?
