In the 1990s, the Mike Caro Brain Trust was founded, promising the most reliable odds about what’s going to happen in current events and politics. Long suspended, the brain trust is being revived, although Caro now bases assessments on his own analysis, with limited dependence on members.
The following odds on the 2016 United States presidential election focus on popular vote. It is possible that a candidate will win the most votes, but lose the election, which is based on the state-by-state electoral college.
Odds only weigh Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump. They will no longer be announced daily if either candidate is out of the race. And they exclude the chance of someone else winning. This is a purely one-on-one evaluation of candidates’ chances of winning the popular vote.
Previously unpublished odds since the Indiana primary in mid-June have Clinton at a high of 62.9% and Trump at a high of 67.5%. The first day that odds were publicly announced (July 16, 2016) marked a new high for Trump. Odds will be updated each day. — MC
↑ = up (from previously announced chance); ↓ = down; ↔ = same
Most recent odds appear at the top of the tracking list below…
→ See current odds (with links to other months)
Friday, September 30, 2016 : Trump 55.1% ↔
(Unchanged from yesterday)
1.23-to-1 against Clinton
(4:09 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: I had expected polls to be released late yesterday, as announced by several major media sources. My mistake. I should have checked the polling sites myself for precise scheduling. Apparently, major polls will appear today, instead.
Trump is on the attack at his rallies, but moderating his tone somewhat — as he has for about a month. It is unclear to me whether his attacks are succeeding.
Clinton has remained fairly quiet. Her attack, launched Monday at the debate, regarding Trump’s alleged verbal assaults on a 1996 Miss Universe, seems to be falling apart. However, to her advantage, the major media has been slow to correct the record.
The vice presidential debate next Tuesday may have more importance than previously expected. That’s because the lead among Clinton and Trump is in doubt, with Clinton most likely a few percentage points ahead. In such an atmosphere, a clear winner for vice president could, indeed, sway the odds. When voter thought processes are deadlocked — as is the case now with undecideds — it’s natural to look for tie breakers. The VP debate could be significant in that regard.
I’m aware that there have been an unusually high number of “unchanged” days in these odds. It’s just a fluke. I can’t help it. Those are the numbers here, and I’m not going to move them by 0.1 just so it will appear more reasonable. No change means no change.
Thursday, September 29, 2016 : Trump 55.1% ↓
(Down 0.7% from yesterday)
1.23-to-1 against Clinton
(2:43 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Yet another low-event day.
Most things that influenced these odds favored Clinton, but only slightly to moderately. Added together and then subtracting the fewer Trump positives, we end up with 0.7 percentage points lost by the Republican candidate.
Some topics considered were the 1996 Miss Universe publicly speaking against Trump, the FBI director being grilled by Republicans in congress about his handing of the Clinton email investigation and granting of immunity, Clinton’s enthusiastic campaign events featuring Bernie Sanders and Michelle Obama, Trump’s overflow rallies, Juanita Broaddrick’s message to Chelsea Clinton regarding former President Bill Clinton’s alleged misbehavior, a few polls favorable to Clinton (although the controversial Los Angeles Times tracking poll showed a bump up for Trump from the previous day), and more.
More important polling results will be made public beginning today. Those percentages could sway this analysis.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016 : Trump 55.8% ↑
(Up 0.1% from yesterday)
1.26-to-1 against Clinton
(3:32 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump makes the smallest gain possible on the scale that these odds are announced — 0.1 percentage points. This is mostly an adjustment to the impact of Monday night’s debate.
As many analysts in the media seem to be hedging on their initial assessment that the debate had gone very badly for Trump, it looks as if he’s likely to survive intact. And there’s even a remote possibility of a gain for him.
We’ll know more when the first polls that include reaction to that head-to-head confrontation are released today through Friday. The wave of polls immediate after that will also matter greatly, because it will reflect more accurately how the debate settled in with the voting public.
There are many minor events influencing these odds, but they pretty much balance. One that threatened Trump — his ungentlemanly remarks about weight gain of the reigning Miss Universe in 1996 — may be less of an issue now that negative news stories have surfaced about her past. So, the Clinton campaign, which announced her endorsement, will probably not get the mileage out of the issue that they had hoped.
Nothing else compelling that I choose to talk about, so let’s leave it short.
Tuesday, September 27, 2016 : Trump 55.7% ↓
(Down 1.0% from yesterday)
1.26-to-1 against Clinton
(4:15 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Changes in today’s odds hinge almost entirely on last night’s debate. But wait!
The one-point drop for Trump isn’t due to his debate performance. If you could freeze time when Clinton and Trump shook hands afterward, I’m guessing that the debate would have been given to Trump by a small majority of viewers registered to vote. But that advantage won’t be realized fully because of what I saw that you probably didn’t. And it’s the reason these comments come hours later than I had intended today.
I recorded the debates with 90-minute extensions and then watched the first 11 minutes to 35 minutes of follow-up commentary on nine channels — CNN, Fox News, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox network, Bloomberg, C-Span, and CNBC. Sadly, I didn’t get to see the follow-up on MSNBC, which would have been my 10th recording, because, mysteriously, only the first 58 minutes of the debate was recorded. (If you’re wondering how I was able to record all this simultaneously, it’s because I have eight DirecTV DVRs linked together, each capable of recording two shows at once. This may seem excessive, but I have this setup for monitoring news events, like tonight’s debate, from multiple sources.) What I discovered from those follow-up commentaries was that most were amazingly biased in declaring Clinton the winner immediately — or at least strongly suggesting such.
You might think that this makes little difference, since, presumably, the viewers just watched the debate and had already formed their opinions. But that isn’t the case. These commentaries tell viewers how they should think and tend to cancel many previously conceived notions based on the actual viewing experience.
If it weren’t for this tremendously overstated bias (one commentator saying immediately that it will now be very hard for Trump to come back and win the election and others verbally digging his grave), I would have given the advantage to Trump. All he needed to do was survive and he did that easily, probably winning in the minds of many. He had weak moments, especially on taxes, whether his claim of initially opposing the Iraq war was true, a real estate racial discrimination suit settled by him when he was 26 years old, and his investigation of President Obama’s birth certificate. His responses in those areas seemed weak to me.
He also failed greatly in hammering Clinton on emails, the Clinton Foundation, Benghazi, or other areas where she is weakest. That was a missed opportunity. His salvation may be that many viewers might have thought something like, “Hey, why isn’t he mentioning that?” And thinking thusly would reinforce those weaknessess in their minds, even without Trump’s help. That’s a bit far-fetched, perhaps, so let’s call it a Trump fumble.
However, Clinton didn’t shine and faded at times. Overall, she seemed energetic enough to put worries about her health aside for now. I believe her core positions were less palatable to the majority of voters than his. Since all he had to do was look significantly more presidential than portrayed by Clinton and most of the media, he succeeded. But the gains that this would have brought were undone by the one-sided analysis afterward.
Last night marks a new low for media integrity, in my opinion. I was amazed by what I saw and heard. They weren’t describing the debate I had just seen. Oddly, several of the broadcasts ended their initial commentary with something like, “Now we take you to the spin room.” Go figure.
Monday, September 26, 2016 : Trump 56.7% ↑
(Up 0.2% from yesterday)
1.31-to-1 against Clinton
(1:00 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump moved up largely on polling that is a bit more favorable. However, the gain was slight, recapturing the 0.2 percentage points he had dropped yesterday.
The battle of front-row seating apparently is over. Clinton had said that her billionaire supporter, Mark Cuban, would sit in the front row of tonight’s debate, perhaps to distract Trump. Trump had countered by suggested he would put Bill Clinton’s mistress, Gennifer Flowers, in the first row. Neither is likely to happen now.
Clinton met with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump had done the same earlier in Netanyahu’s New York visit. This constitutes the tiniest of gains for Trump, because his recent appearances with world leaders (Egypt’s, Mexico’s, Israel’s) increase his limited international stature (although he already had a friendly relationship with Netanyahu) and thereby help him more than Clinton, who already has earned her diplomatic credentials.
Right now, Trump has a 56.7 percent chance of winning the popular vote. If the debate is a draw, that will go up. If Clinton wins decisively, he will fall well below 50 percent. If he does something goofy that’s poorly perceived by the public, he could fall as far as, say, five percent. The same goes for Clinton. Her performance, compared to his, can mean she’ll be an overwhelming underdog after tonight or a very large favorite — but most likely tomorrow’s odds will remain far away from those extremes. Again, we wait.
Sunday, September 25, 2016 : Trump 56.5% ↓
(Down 0.2% from yesterday)
1.30-to-1 against Clinton
(3:29 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: This will be another very short analysis.
Clinton is believed to be preparing intensely for Monday’s debate, even practicing against multiple versions of Trump that might “show up.” I guess the thinking is that Trump has multiple personalities or, at least, personas. Trump is said to be preparing less intensely.
Clinton has offered Mark Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas NBA team who has endorsed her, a front-row seat. Possibly that’s an attempt to put Trump off his game. In turn, Trump has toyed with returning the favor by putting Gennifer Flowers, Bill Clinton’s mistress years ago, in the front row. Isn’t this fun?
Trump drops a trivial 0.2 percentage points. We wait.
Saturday, September 24, 2016 : Trump 56.7% ↓
(Down 0.5% from yesterday)
1.31-to-1 against Clinton
(2:08 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Not much to say. Please read commenst from previous days to get up to speed on the direction of these odds.
Trump will make a public appearance today. Clinton will not, according to her team, but she’s preparing for Monday night’s debate. She was scheduled to visit Charlotte, North Carolina, the site of protests over a highly-publicized police shooting of an African American man. But she changed her mind.
Trump’s less-ambiguous pro-police stance likely is registering a bit better with more voters than Clinton’s concern for both sides (which, of course, appeals to some). However, he may be losing a bit of the gains he made with African Americans. National polls leave Trump within reach, but not edging ahead the way that momentum had suggested.
We wait for Monday.
Considering everything that entered into this analysis, Trump falls another 0.5 percentage points.
Friday, September 23, 2016 : Trump 57.2% ↓
(Down 1.1% from yesterday)
1.34-to-1 against Clinton
(5:20 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Not much new to analyze. A major national poll yesterday, showing Clinton leading Trump by six percentage points, is probably discouraging to the latter’s campaign. Almost certainly, they were hoping for better.
However, other poll results — especially in individual, highly contested states — met or exceeded Trump’s likely expectations. So, the polling indications are mixed, but the absence of continued clear gains for Trump is responsible for most of his 1.1 percentage point drop in these odds.
In a video conference, Clinton was described as scary (using that precise term or similar) by many viewers. It wasn’t so much the words she used in attacking Trump as it was her close-up expressions that many found “off.” If it were an actress in a movie, the audience would have been alerted that this was going to be a character with mental issues, as the plot unfolded. Clearly, that isn’t what she meant to convey, but it just registered that way with many amateur and professional commentators. I’m guessing that video will be used in opposing ads, probably without much comment. It’s unfortunate for Clinton, because her tone of voice and zoomed-in expressions weren’t that far from acceptable. The clip just registered as bizarre for many — and that’s probably bad luck for Clinton. And still she gains in these odds. Go figure. Oh, right, I already did that.
Other factors and events were weighed, as always. Clinton is now preparing for their first debate almost full time, according to staff. Trump, not so much. So, what is likely to happen in Monday night’s one-on-one encounter? Almost anything.
Thursday, September 22, 2016 : Trump 58.3% ↔
(Unchanged from yesterday)
1.40-to-1 against Clinton
(3:00 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Clinton did appear in public, despite earlier reports that she might not. Oddly, she didn’t talk about Trump, a glaring change of course that might only be temporary. A war of ads broke out on TV in some battleground states. Clinton’s ads mostly blasted Trump, while his were somewhat more positive. There is no clear advantage to either side.
Most of yesterday’s polls were a little more friendly to Trump, but not all. The Real Clear Politics average of selected recent polls has Clinton up 1.9 percentage points head-to-head and by 1.5 in the current four-way race (with Johnson and Stein included). Trump’s electoral college hopes are improving, but — once more — these odds don’t deal with that.
The rioting in Charlotte, North Carolina, triggered by a killing of a black man by a black police officer (and possibly including the recent killing of another black man in Tulsa, Oklahoma by a white female officer) is likely to bring more support to Trump than Clinton. Anyway, the airing of the event (Fox News/Hannity) was delayed until tomorrow, due to continuous coverage of the Charlotte situation.
Trump addressed a town hall with a largely African American audience and voiced his support of “stop and frisk” policies that many in that demographic oppose. It’s hard to determine whether doing this is a gain for Trump (because he’s saying what he thinks, rather than pandering) or a loss (because the policy is unpopular with many black voters).
As the first debate threatens to shake up the race on Monday, these odds (which include factors previously discussed and others) stay unchanged. Actually Trump gained about 0.06 in the percentage point category. If you’re thinking that it should round off to a 0.1 gain and be reflected in the published odds, you’re on the right track. However, yesterday’s announced 58.3 percent was actually about 58.26. Add the 0.06 and you get 58.32 today. Both days round to 58.3. I’m only telling you this so you understand that, while there have been several unchanged days, there actually was some movement.
Wednesday, September 21, 2016 : Trump 58.3% ↓
(Down 0.8% from yesterday)
1.40-to-1 against Clinton
(1:02 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Just when I expected no significant movement until after the first debate Monday, we get movement. Not colossal movement or an earthquake. But 0.8 percentage points worth of movement. And it went Clinton’s way.
As often is the case with these odds, this change isn’t obvious. It’s based on a couple of polls that might be disturbing to the Trump campaign. One showed Clinton ahead by five percentage points nationally and the other showed her leading by the same amount in Florida. These polls contrast to recent trends and most would have expected the national one to be much closer and for the Florida one to show Trump ahead. If the results of these polls are mirrored by the next batch, it would suggest that the recent Trump surge is over. He would rather have had it end with a lead, which seemed to be a strong possibility.
As Clinton’s health concerns, while still a major factor, fade from the immediate spotlight, Clinton gains by having the news focused elsewhere. However, a late announcement that Clinton has cancelled another appearance — this one a fundraiser in the battleground state of North Carolina — could reverse this factor, if it turns out to be health related. President Obama’s speeches on her behalf (including his vague negative reference of Trump, although not naming him, before the United Nations yesterday) are beginning to register. This is primarily due to the fact that his popularity has risen surprisingly lately.
Meanwhile, Trump seems a bit more strident on the campaign trail. This threatens to remind voters of his earlier campaign self that was not broadly popular beyond the base primary voters that won the Republican nomination for him.
Most other factors, but not all, favored Clinton, too. So, at least for a day, Clinton’s prospects of winning the popular vote are improving. Oddly, Trump’s chances of winning the Electoral College vote are also improving recently, but that’s not what these odds are about.
Tuesday, September 20, 2016 : Trump 59.1% ↑
(Up 0.1% from yesterday)
1.44-to-1 against Clinton
(1:44 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Today’s odds were mainly influenced by the way previous events unfolded. Trump made an insignificant 0.1 percentage point gain.
Although yesterday was a fairly heavy news day — mostly focused on terrorist bombing attempts, a related arrest, and a knifing attack also linked to Islamic extremism — there was no major change in the presidential chances.
Trump made some minor errors — particularly by taking a bit too harsh of a terrorism position, relative to immigration.
Clinton made some minor errors — particularly by seeming a bit too soft on terrorism and having little enthusiasm in her presentation or voice when fielding related questions.
Sprinkle in other factors and you’re left with almost no change in either candidates hopes.
Monday, September 19, 2016 : Trump 59.0% ↓
(Down 0.3% from yesterday)
1.44-to-1 against Clinton
(2:30 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: The Trump momentum seems to be decreasing. The race is left with Clinton leading slightly in most polls and trailing in a few. One week from today will be the first debate.
Expect less volatility than usual until that debate concludes. Voters will be waiting to see what happens. While they do that, less focus will be made on minor events, although major happenings may still give candidates a significant pre-debate boost.
As I’ve said, if you’ve been following these daily comments, Trump doesn’t need to win the debates. Because he’s been painted by Clinton and the media as crude and uninformed, it won’t require a superior performance to dissuade some voters of that notion. Conversely, Clinton may need clear victories.
The explosive devices found in New York and New Jersey, along with the stabbings at a Minnesota mall, are playing out as a very slight potential gain for Trump, although he is probably not benefiting immediately. Clinton’s charge that he jumped ahead of the story at a campaign rally by announcing that there had been “bombings” in New York and that he didn’t know what to make of it yet, was well publicized. But attacking Trump for this will do little damage and may seem to some as if Clinton and her supporters are making too much of him saying bombs when it could have been other kinds of explosions. That was a heavy issue in campaign coverage, but amounts to little in terms of these odds.
The leveling off of Trump’s surge a bit earlier than I expected is mostly what’s behind Clinton’s 0.3 percentage point gain.
Sunday, September 18, 2016 : Trump 59.3% ↑
(Up 0.2% from yesterday)
1.46-to-1 against Clinton
(7:45 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: There’s much less to discuss this time, as far as events that influenced the odds. That doesn’t mean ongoing previous events and trends aren’t important.
Much of the media and Democrats claimed Trump had been reckless by saying that Clinton’s bodyguards should be disarmed and then we’ll see what happens. For journalists to report seriously that he was, perhaps, threatening Clinton is remarkably childlike. Even if you missed the obvious — it was a political stance against what he asserts is unnecessary gun regulation — the word “dangerous,” which he used to describe what would happen if you did that should have given those reporters and pundits a clue. I’m only stressing this otherwise minor incident to demonstrate something that isn’t minor: A large segment of traditional media has become so anti-Trump that it’s a daunting negative for him. And these odds reflect that.
Explosive devices found in New York and New Jersey (two of them detonating) will make the public more concerned with terrorism, even if these turn out to be unrelated to Islamic extremism. That works in Trump’s favor. There was also a stabbing incident tentatively linked to Islamic terror in Minnesota.
President Obama said he would take it as a personal insult if African-Americans decided not to vote for Clinton. I wrestled mentally to imagine how this impacts the candidates’ chances and decided the effect is minimal. Clearly, it was an attempt to keep even a small percentage of blacks from defecting from Clinton. But in a strange new world where so much is considered racist, it will be interesting if the media pays attention to this glaring example.
Trump moves up modestly — a 0.2 percentage point gain.
Saturday, September 17, 2016 : Trump 59.1% ↑
(Up 0.6% from yesterday)
1.44-to-1 against Clinton
(4:53 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump seemed in trouble yesterday morning, after being attacked by Clinton and others for his probe of President Obama’s place of birth. The charges from supporters of Clinton even included one that his investigation was racist and that it would not have happened had Obama been white. That speculation about Trump seems wrong to those who believe there’s nothing racist about him, but rings true to others who have doubts.
You might want to research the controversy about where Obama was born, if you’re not up to speed on what we’re discussing. Anyway, he handled the so-called “birther” situation by saying he would have a major announcement and suggesting to the press that he would take questions. So, they gathered and waited for over an hour for the public appearance to begin. When it did, it was different from what the press had expected. He brought key military men to the stage with him and one-by-one they made short speeches praising him. Finally, he got to the part the press and the public were anticipating and simply said (1) Clinton had started the whole birther thing in her 2008 primary campaign against Obama (something that the Clinton team disputes); (2) His investigation had finished the controversy; and (3) President Obama was born in America. Then he said, approximately, that now we can move on to making America great again (his campaign slogan). Then he walked off without taking questions. That left the press stunned and many among them angry.
Yet, it was strategically strong, certainly not ending discussion over what could be a big negative for him, especially among African Americans. But at least he played his hand in a way that minimized damage, while spotlighting both him and his latest hotel where the event happened.
Clinton, meanwhile, maintained her image of improved health in public appearances, and continued to attack Trump as unqualified, bigoted, and more.
Other events factored into these odds, as always. Polls continued to show movement in Trump’s direction. So, overall, it amounted to a 0.6 point percentage gain for Trump.
Friday, September 16, 2016 : Trump 58.5% ↑
(Up 0.7% from yesterday)
1.41-to-1 against Clinton
(3:47 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump made two strong TV appearances yesterday, showcasing his good nature and charm — whether real or pretended. This will contrast to his widely perceived persona as a mean-spirited, crude and insensitive human being — an image that has been painted by Democrats, much of the news coverage, and by his own actions. This is a plus for Trump.
He also appeared before an economics-minded audience, laying out his visions for an improving economy. It was a small gathering that was moderately receptive. At night, he addressed a larger campaign rally. Since he stuck to his new, less-bombastic strategy in both cases, these also rate as a small plus for him.
Trump was a Dr. Oz guest, answering health questions, on the Fox network (not Fox News cable). The audience is typically mostly female, so the milder disposition he portrayed while revealing his latest medical test results, which seemed reassuring, might help him a bit with women voters — among whom he is trailing Clinton. His later TV appearance was mostly for fun and exposure on NBC’s Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. Trump ended by allowing Fallon to muss up his hair, a silly act requested by the host that probably was enjoyed by viewers and made some less-serious-minded voters feel more comfortable about his candidacy.
Clinton returned to the campaign trail looking healthy, which will be reassuring to many. So, that goes into her plus column.
Meanwhile Trump continued to surge in latest polls, certainly a plus. But increased scrutiny on his charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, is a minus that may be a bigger problem on the horizon. Altogether, a 0.7 percentage point gain for Trump.
Thursday, September 15, 2016 : Trump 57.8% ↑
(Up 0.1% from yesterday)
1.37-to-1 against Clinton
(2:36 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Odds movement yesterday revolved (among other factors) around two main happenings. They pulled in opposite directions. But the net effect was only a tiny gain for Trump — 0.1 percentage points.
Not included among the tidal events was the release of hacked emails from retired general Colin Powell, which happened earlier but only resonated yesterday. He was critical of both candidates, privately calling Trump “a national disgrace.” But his irritation with Clinton for trying to convince voters that he had mishandled email in similar ways will harm her. Since he identifies as a Republican, that would tend to hurt Trump greatly — because he is widely admired — but actually the damage is minimized. The reason is that Powell isn’t strongly Republican and backed President Obama in both previous races. We’ll call this pretty much a neutral with a barely measurable advantage to Trump, especially because of other doubts Powell raised about her health and character.
The first of the events that matter more was the announcement of an investigation of the Donald J. Trump Foundation by New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman. The Trump Foundation is a charitable entity, much like the heavily scrutinized Clinton Foundation, except much smaller in scope. The exact focus of the investigation is murky, but possibly includes an illegal contribution made to the attorney general of Florida, Pam Bondi, for which Trump was assessed a fine. However, the investigation itself will seem politically motivated to those who know that Schneiderman is a Democrat who has been closely aligned with Clinton and publicly supports her. But even assuming this is a mostly politically inspired investigation, the effect likely will be to neutralize the potential scandal involving the Clinton Foundation. Although the two assertions of wrongdoing aren’t similar in scope, because Clinton’s troubles involve possible government favors for contributions while secretary of state, they are sure to be painted as equal by Democrats and by portions of the press supporting her almost openly. Score this as a Trump negative.
But scored as a Trump positive is his continued rise in the polls. He has taken the lead in several battleground states where he had previously trailed. And while that doesn’t directly influence these odds, which are based on popular vote nationwide, it does indirectly give him a boast by providing a more positive perception of his chances.
Also, Trump has surprised many by staying on strategy for several weeks. Put it all together with previously discussed (and still-monitored) factors and you have almost no change in today’s odds — just an insignificant step upward for Trump.
Today, Trump will appear on a TV show to discuss his health (some details of the prerecorded interview have already leaked) and Clinton is expected to return to campaigning (see previous discussion of her health issues). Those events may influence their respective chances by tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Wednesday, September 14, 2016 : Trump 57.7% ↓
(Down 0.4% from yesterday)
1.36-to-1 against Clinton
(6:35 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: The dominant media seems to be in high gear minimizing Clinton’s health issues. Particularly glowing coverage of President Obama’s campaign speech on her behalf helped to minimize the damage caused by her stumbling and perhaps fainting when leaving a 9/11 ceremony early. She continues to recover and has not made appearances in person, only by phone.
Trump made a major address last night focusing on child care and related issues. While his somewhat progressive recommendations may prompt some women to feel more warmly toward him, they are certain to cause debate among Republican and conservative voters. I view this as a neutral for Trump, but may turn out to be slightly positive or negative.
On the email front, aides to Clinton who asserted their fifth amended rights to remain silent during a congressional hearing yesterday probably hurt her cause, as did a key witness’ refusal to show up at all. Clinton’s worries about being perceived as hiding evidence continue to grow.
A war of TV ads between the campaigns probably favored Trump. Both tried to use the opposing candidate’s own words to attack, but Clinton’s quoted short clips were largely out of context, while Trump’s showed Clinton saying half of his supporters belonged in “a basket of deplorables” and then made it seem as if the whole audience of patriotic Americans were being disrespected. A small plus for Trump here.
Overall, Clinton seems to be surviving her health issues better than expected. The lack of investigative reporting following her most recent episode seems glaring. And this will help her. So, I have Trump fading by 0.4 percentage points.
Tuesday, September 13, 2016 : Trump 58.1% ↑
(Up 1.3% from yesterday)
1.39-to-1 against Clinton
(2:11 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump moved up again, but only by 1.3 percentage points. You might think that’s a conservative adjustment in light of the two major hits her campaign has suffered in the past few days.
First, there was her now-clear mistake of saying that half of Trump supporters belonged in what she called “a basket of deplorables.” That hasn’t been received well by Trump supporters, those undecided, more moderate voters, or women voters who are turned off by Trump’s harsh rhetoric and now are perceiving the same coming from Clinton. Second, her fainting or stumbling into a waiting van after having to leave a 9/11 ceremony early. As I said previously, that made the previous rumors and milder video and photographic evidence of similar previous episodes more believable — even though her campaign is attributing this event to pneumonia.
And Trump avoided the disaster that I talked about yesterday and that some of his supporters undoubtedly feared: Criticizing Clinton for her health issues immediately at a time when sympathy was appropriate. In fact, he played his hand in the opposite manner, wishing her a speedy recovery and saying he was looking forward to their first debate in two weeks. So, another Trump positive.
However, Clinton could gain sympathy votes if she appears healthy and vigorous in appearances later this week. (Already, she has cancelled several days of campaigning.) That would be reassuring to many voters who might then be cheering for her to rebound. If she can pull it off, that can actually work in her favor.
Trump has said he will disclose his health records soon. The pressure will then (assuming that happens) be on Clinton to mirror his actions.
There is talk in Democrat circles of replacing Clinton on the ticket, if necessary. If that happens, these odds won’t matter, because they’re based on the assumption that both Trump and Clinton will be the major party candidates on election day. (See explanation at the top of this page).
A replacement for Clinton does matter in these odds, though, despite the fact that they only measure the two candidates against each other. That’s because if Trump begins to run away from her in the polls, it’s more likely Clinton will withdraw — either voluntarily or through pressure from the party. If that happens soon (note that early voting is already available to some), Trump’s head-to-head chances against Hillary are reduced mathematically, because her withdrawal is more likely to be from a race he would have been likely to win.
Trump’s appearance before members of the National Guard yesterday was particularly well delivered and received. It was more calm and presidential than Trump addresses from a month ago and earlier.
I have Trump jumping up another 1.3 percentage points today. And coupled with yesterday’s 0.5 gain, Clinton’s new troubles only amount to under a two percent drop — less of an adjustment than you’ll find elsewhere — although these chances still remain more favorable to Trump than other widely published betting odds.
Monday, September 12, 2016 : Trump 56.8% ↑
(Up 0.5% from yesterday)
1.31-to-1 against Clinton
(1:07 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Most analysts forecast a major Trump upswing due to Clinton’s near-fainting and stumbling episode upon making an emergency exit from a 9/11 remembrance ceremony yesterday. That makes sense, except…
Clinton might successfully sell her campaign’s assertion that this was caused by pneumonia, which she had been recently diagnosed to have, but hadn’t revealed. And if she can seem healthy in her next public appearances, then the public might largely dismiss the event and even feel sympathetic.
If Trump makes any less-than-empathetic comments that sound like “I told you so,” — in harmony with his campaign’s assertion that Clinton is hiding health issues — then that could seriously wound his chances. In fact, if he’d done that today, a misstep some might think would have been in keeping with Trump’s speak-unregulated nature, the damage could have been fatal to his campaign. As it is, he probably impressed doubters by not trying to take advantage.
The big problem for Clinton is that her loss of equilibrium happened at a time when other similar episodes were under scrutiny. Presumably those weren’t caused by pneumonia. So, while the damage to Clinton is survivable now, it could be compounded if her explanation is met widely with skepticism. No matter what, the existence of a video showing Clinton’s dramatic collapse will help Trump.
I’m not moving these odds as greatly as you might expect, based on this incident. And Clinton regained a little ground because the latest major poll showed her five percentage points ahead — less than the expected gain for Trump. So, incorporated with other events, Trump gains only half a percentage point, but the race is again increasing in volatility.
Sunday, September 11, 2016 : Trump 56.3% ↔
(Unchanged from yesterday)
1.29-to-1 against Clinton
(2:40 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Clinton promptly retracted her statement Friday that half of Trump’s supporters were racist and sexist (among other things) and that they fit into a “basket of deplorables.” Apparently the campaign decided that line of attack was doing mostly harm and needed to be softened or abandoned.
Trump attended Phyllis Schlafly’s funeral, addressed the congregation at St. Louis Cathedral Basilica, and was given a standing ovation. But since Schlafly, who died at age 92, was a controversial conservative activist, the political benefit of his appearance is minimal beyond his base supporters.
Republicans are threatening a serious legislative probe into latest revelations they feel are damaging to Clinton. You can consider this a pre-criminal investigation, if it happens, since the end result would be to recommend filing of charges against her, if the findings merit.
This may be seen as too political and may actually hurt Trump. That’s because it’s the story of her alleged misdeeds itself that damages her, not criminal prosecution. However, some Republicans in congress may be looking out for the United States’ legal and structural future and not thinking in narrow political terms. No doubt, others are approaching this purely as a get-Hillary tactic — and that may backfire.
There were many other events (previously tracked and new), but nothing major to move the odds. Everything seemed to balance and leave these odds unmoved.
Saturday, September 10, 2016 : Trump 56.3% ↓
(Down 0.4% from yesterday)
1.29-to-1 against Clinton
(3:38 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: The rate of gain for Trump in the polls is slowing, but not completely stopped. This means that the shift may settle at an almost even race or with a slight Trump advantage. Previously, these odds had expected Trump to exit this wave with a 2.5 percentage-point lead. So, the probable (but not certain) shortfall is enough to enhance Clinton’s odds.
However, this has a diminished long-term effect, because the polls may now be poised for an even higher gain for Trump if the next surge goes in his direction. Think of it as a build-up of energy in reserve. Less than expected was used, meaning more remains. However, if the next wave of public opinion goes Clinton’s way, that can greatly benefit her, because she will be more in the lead than she would have and Trump supporters are more likely to feel desperation. This is more an exercise in examining mass psychology than mathematical science. So if you believe my odds, then you need to know that psychological assessments of the public are part of the equation.
So, let’s talk about yesterday. Not much to shake the earth. Clinton gave a very impressive, soft toned speech and took a handful of questions from the press afterward. However, she returned to the podium, as if to have second thoughts when hearing a question from among the reporters. Her answer gave her a chance to attack Trump, still in an unusually soft voice. Fine. What others have failed to notice is that her reconsideration about whether to answer another question was choreographed.
I guess it’s my tell-reading ability that makes this obvious. I’m not certain whether the reporter’s question that made her pivot, gesture, and return to the podium was planned. Perhaps she was instructed or independently decided in advance to act that way in response to any question, real or imaginary, that mentioned Trump. But I’m quite sure that her action wasn’t spontaneous. It was pre-planned and not acted perfectly — otherwise I would have been less likely to spot this. However, this hasn’t been discussed widely or investigated (nor would it likely be a big issue if it were), so the effect is almost nonexistent. However, it demonstrates an obstacle for Trump, because it shows that he is facing a much more sophisticated opposition than his own team is likely to equal — even if that were his goal, which it probably isn’t.
Trump’s rally in Pensacola, Florida boasted an enthusiastic overflow crowd. But this is typical for him, and not much news was made in his address.
The Clinton team is now striking at Trump’s strengths, even trying to use his campaign slogan “Make American Great Again” against him by suggesting that it’s racist. That might actually work for her, because muddying waters, no matter how obvious it is to some, will often confuse others. She might have taken it too far, though, by saying, last night, that half of Trump’s supporters were in a “basket of deplorables” — racist, sexist, and more. That is likely to serve more as a get-out-the-vote incentive for Trump than it is to pad Clinton’s vote total. A mistake.
In summary, both campaigns are using quality strategy right now, but Clinton’s is probably a bit superior. Nonetheless, she has more to overcome. So, we’ll see. These odds might jump quickly in either direction. For now, Clinton gains 0.4 percentage points as a likelihood of winning the popular vote.
Friday, September 9, 2016 : Trump 56.7% ↑
(Up 1.3% from yesterday)
1.31-to-1 against Clinton
(1:59 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: This first observation is sure to be controversial, but I’ve given it more impact on the election that you might expect. Before I tell you about it, let’s acknowledge that conservative websites are giving it more credibility than it probably merits, but there’s a chance they’re right. Also, I see this as probably having little importance on the election outcome, but there’s about a 35 percent chance that it will register and weigh against Clinton.
Mathematically, when you factor in something that’s, say, 65 percent likely to have no effect or little effect, but has a 35 percent chance of having a modest to significant effect, that does two things. It adds greatly to the volatility of the odds and it favors the candidate who is less likely to be damaged. In this case, it’s a positive for Trump, though — as I said — more likely to amount to little or nothing.
Now that I’ve shared how this works in analyzing odds correctly, let’s end the suspense by explaining what I’m talking about. At the NBC/MSNBC “Commander-in-Chief Forum” on Wednesday, Clinton is alleged to have worn a small, skin-tone earpiece. Conspiracy-minded pundits on the right are using so-called enhanced photographs and suggesting that the device (if present) might have been used to feed information and talking points to Clinton while she was interviewed. On the other hand, left-wing media and websites are exhibiting photos that seem to show that there was nothing in Clinton’s ear at all.
So, how does one evaluate this? Well, I carefully examined recordings of the event and the photo evidence on both sides. It seems more likely than not to me that actually there was something in Clinton’s left ear. However, even if this turns out to be true (and it might not), there could be other explanations for its presence. It could be just cosmetic application of a substance used to cover a blemish. It could be a normal hearing aid that she wears occasionally. It could be a medical device to combat inner ear equilibrium, perhaps caused by her recent concussion. And there are even more alternate explanations.
So, we’re left to speculate on how this will play out. But currently, it benefits Trump, who’s son (Donald Jr.) has made public statements questioning the apparent (to him) presence of the device. That alone guarantees that the issue will make its way into the mainstream — either to be ridiculed as a right-wing smear or to be further investigated (or both). For that reason it potentially is a significant factor that favors Trump, although there’s a strong chance it won’t even be an issue. If that last sentence seems illogical to you, reread my earlier paragraphs about how these events influence odds and you’ll probably understand what I’m saying.
Also yesterday, Trump made what was billed as an education speech at a poorly performing school and was met politely, but not enthusiastically, by the audience. Still the fact that he ventured into that potentially hostile arena and spoke softly probably helped his image. Meanwhile, Clinton continued to pummel Trump by spotlighting words he’s uttered and positions he’s taken on national defense. She attacked him for his criticism of some leading military commanders. Her approach is probably scoring with many voters and might diminish the flow of undecided voters toward Trump (something that seems to be happening, judging by his rise in recent polls).
Putting it all together with other tracked factors (and some new ones), Trump jumps up 1.3 percentage points.
Thursday, September 8, 2016 : Trump 55.4% ↑
(Up 0.2% from yesterday)
1.24-to-1 against Clinton
(2:23 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump gave a surprisingly soft-spoken address in Philadelphia that was well received. Then at night, both Clinton and Trump performed on an NBC/MSNBC one-hour forum. They appeared back to back and never together.
The Matt Lauer interviews, peppered with audience questions, were equally tough, and they seemed fair. Viewers will differ on which candidate did best, but neither excelled. Trump probably gained simply because he seemed reasonable, but not quite as presidential as he had earlier in the day.
Trump continues to close on Clinton and is now within 2.1 percent in the Real Clear Politics daily average. Since the polls with the highest Clinton lead are the oldest and will soon drop off the recent list, the race likely will get even closer in the RCP average.
Other tracked factors and a few minor new happenings tended to slightly favor Trump beyond what this analysis had anticipated. Score this as a 0.2 percent gain for Trump, measured a percentage probability of winning the popular vote.
Wednesday, September 7, 2016 : Trump 55.2% ↓
(Down 0.2% from yesterday)
1.23-to-1 against Clinton
(1:00 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Clinton is starting to score slightly with her targeted ad campaign that uses Trump’s own words to paint him as an undesirable choice for commander-in-chief. Her campaign has used this tactic in the past, but new iterations and repetition of the theme are swaying some voters.
The issue of a Trump charity having made a $25,000 political donation to a group backing Pam Bondi, Florida Republican attorney general, is costing him. Right now, it’s not a major issue, but could become more harmful. The Florida attorney general’s office was apparently considering a lawsuit against Trump University at the time of the donation. While some are suggesting that the emphasis on this is a stretch when compared to Clinton’s greater transgressions, it could serve to diminish Trump’s advantage in attacking her for those.
A new CNN poll shows that Trump has now gained a two-percentage-point lead nationally among likely voters. That equates with three recent lesser-followed polls that also show him ahead. A recent Fox News poll has him two points behind, but having gained. It is widely believed that Trump will be narrowing Clinton’s lead in the less-frequently-announced battleground state polls, when new results are published.
Clinton and Trump will appear tonight on NBC and MSNBC in the “Commander-in-Chief Forum.” This isn’t a debate and the candidates will appear separately. Trump won a coin toss and will go after Clinton, which may be a slight advantage, even if he doesn’t get to hear how she answered. As pointed out yesterday, this event may be elevated to the stature of a semi-debate in the minds of some voters, who could compare the candidates and make decisions.
Trump is sticking to his more-scripted messages and addressed an enthusiastic crowd in Tampa, Florida yesterday. Clinton also appeared in the same area, addressing a smaller audience.
Clinton gained a little ground in these odds yesterday (0.2 percentage points), her third positive day consecutively.
Tuesday, September 6, 2016 : Trump 55.4% ↓
(Down 0.1% from yesterday)
1.24-to-1 against Clinton
(2:25 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Among other happenings that affected the odds, Clinton held what is being loosely described as a press conference yesterday. Actually, it was only a closed exchange with reporters on her campaign plane — the ones who follow her from place to place and have just now been allowed in the back of her main plane, rather than traveling separately, as before.
There were a few semi-hard-line questions, but no follow-up probing of her routine answers. And a few questions were quite silly and fluffy. Nonetheless, she came across as sincere, and the media will probably take sound bites of her answers that will be appealing to many voters.
Oddly, when asked about possible Russian hacking of Democratic National Committee and other emails, she blamed it on Trump. Whether or not that tactic will be effective or seem too convoluted depends on how the exchange is presented and analyzed. I’m guessing it will have little effect, but the exchange with reporters will be slightly positive for her.
Unfortunately, from her campaign’s perspective, she had two serious episodes of coughing yesterday — one on the campaign plane while addressing reporters and one while delivering a campaign speech. These are certain to prompt more questions about her health, particularly since they’ve happened previously.
Meanwhile Trump seems more and more incapable of using common sense in choosing his tactics. Among several exhibits is his bizarre attack on Arizona Republican senator Jeff Flake, who is running for reelection. Trump tweeted that Flake was “very weak and ineffective.” Sure, the senator has decline to endorse Trump, but it would be politically savvy to say kind and forgiving things, rather than attack. That’s obvious, particularly since Trump presumably wants Republicans to retain control of the Senate. So, this strikes me as yet another Trump go-figure moment.
Also, probably a misstep is Trump’s previous acceptance of an opportunity to participate in so-called “Commander-in-Chief Forum” on NBC and MSNBC tomorrow. It will be hosted by Matt Lauer, who many perceive as hostile to Trump and Republicans in general. Although it will be held before a largely military audience, which would generally favor Trump, the topics will be veterans issues, the military, and national security — areas of expertise where Clinton might excel.
While the candidates won’t address each other face-to-face and will be asked questions separately, this could be perceived as a pre-debate. That could take some suspense from the first debate on September 26. And, if Trump falters, he could be written off by some voters before the actual debates begin.
All-in-all, I believe this is too risky for Trump. Although he has an excellent chance of surviving, and a smaller chance of outshining Clinton, the payoff won’t be huge and the risk is excessive. Although the forum had already been factored into these odds, it may be too great of a gamble now, because Trump is gaining in the polls and may not need to take chances. That’s why this event is weighing more heavily against Trump than it did days ago.
Put everything together and we have almost no change in these odds — just a 0.1 percent Clinton gain.
Monday, September 5, 2016 : Trump 55.5% ↓
(Down 0.2% from yesterday)
1.25-to-1 against Clinton
(3:03 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Trump slipped a bit (0.2 percentage points). It’s not because he stopped gaining momentum, but because he is benefiting slightly less than I expected, based on recent events.
Nothing new of major import entered the arena. Continuously tracked events are pretty much on course, whether favorable or unfavorable to either candidate.
It’s expected here that next week’s round of polling results will show further gains for Trump. But that has already been factored into these odds.
Sunday, September 4, 2016 : Trump 55.7% ↑
(Up 0.7% from yesterday)
1.26-to-1 against Clinton
(2:48 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Clinton continues to suffer from Friday’s FBI release of notes taken when agents interviewed her in early July. However, the damage is minimized by the Labor Day weekend, with many voters not fully focused on news events.
Trump, meanwhile, scored significantly by addressing mostly invited guests at an African-American nondenominational church in Detroit. His tone was soft and his reception was better than I expected. Dozens of protesters gathered outside, but there was no violence.
There seems to be a consensus among analysts that, although addressing a largely black audience, he was really appealing to moderate whites and women who need to see a more conciliatory Trump demeanor to be won over. While I think that’s true, I also believe that their assumption that he won’t win any significant African-American votes by reaching out in this way is wrong. These odds, at this moment, assume that he’ll win 12.5 percent of the black vote, despite current polls that show him winning as little as two percent.
Other tracked factors were also leaning slightly Trump’s way. The net gain for Trump was 0.7 percent.
Saturday, September 3, 2016 : Trump 55.0% ↓
(Down 0.3% from yesterday)
1.22-to-1 against Clinton
(2:52 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Clinton had a terrible day. So why is Trump down 0.3 percentage points in these odds? Good question, so I’ll tell you.
First, the reason for Clinton’s uncomfortable day was that the FBI made public the notes taken by agents when she was interviewed by them at the end of their email investigation. The notes confirmed suspicions of her critics. She seemed less than candid, saying she couldn’t remember a dozen key events they asked her about. (She claimed not to be able to remember more than a dozen times, but the other instances were less important.)
It was also revealed that she had 13 personal devices, but she couldn’t remember how the out-of-service ones were discarded. Separately, it was disclosed that two were destroyed by a staff member, using a hammer. All of this, and several more related discoveries, harm Clinton.
But the disclosure (what is sometimes called a “document dump”) happened on the Friday before a three-day weekend, meaning the revelations will be old news by Tuesday, when many voters would otherwise pay more attention. So, she’s likely to escape on the front-end, but there may be long-term damage.
The single reason pulling Trump back from a clear gain was his relapse into horrible strategy. He seemed to engage in a tweet war with the Mexican president, Nieto. After Wednesday’s diplomatic meeting in which he was spotlighted as a potential statesman, tweeting negatively about the man who hosted him in Mexico isn’t what he should do. Nieto may have started it by boasting that he’d told Trump Mexico wouldn’t pay for the border wall, as the Republican candidate has assured Americans that it will. Trump should have been savvy enough to recognize the tough political spot Nieto was in, having taken heat for inviting Trump (as well as Clinton who hasn’t yet accepted). Trump should have remained silent.
But as seems to be his nature, he took it personally and counter-attacked. Trump will self-destruct if he reverts to his previous undisciplined self in the late stages of this campaign. If he doesn’t, he’ll survive and probably win. But it’s his apparent lack of understanding about what’s appropriate to say (and when) that is the biggest volatility in this election. Because his tweets, which aren’t very damaging right now, signal that he still may not have the discipline to remain on track, he’s thrown a new variable into a winning surge. And for that reason, he lost ground.
Friday, September 2, 2016 : Trump 55.3% ↑
(Up 0.6% from yesterday)
1.24-to-1 against Clinton
(5:30 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: From the aggregate perspective of voters, latest revelations regarding Clinton emails — and, particularly, newly found evidence that she may have continued to communicate classified information when no longer Secretary of State — have reached diminishing returns status for Trump. That means each additional negative finding adds little to the hard-to-remember collection of transgressions. The voters are concerned, bewildered, or tired of hearing about it. So, Trump has gained about as much as he can from this and he’ll need to stress other avenues of attack.
The reluctance of Clinton to hold a news conference for nine months is beginning to be a bigger problem. It’s moving some votes away from her, but so far not a significant number.
As I explained yesterday, Trump made a mistake by not weaving statements of compassion into his hard-line immigration speech Wednesday night. That followed a positive appearance with the Mexican president where he seemed statesmanlike. He is paying the price for that error.
Still, Trump continues his rise in the polls and the enthusiasm gap between his core supporters and Clinton’s is widening in his favor. The longer this trend continues, the more these odds will shift in his direction. Weigh in all other tracked factors and we see Trump making a semi-significant upward move yesterday, even without any major events.
Thursday, September 1, 2016 : Trump 54.7% ↑
(Up 0.3% from yesterday)
1.21-to-1 against Clinton
(2:29 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S.)
Quick comments: Well, it was an interesting yesterday. Trump moved up three-tenths of a percentage point in these odds. But he could have improved more.
Clinton spoke before a gathering of American Legion members. Her reception was polite, with applause here and there. She did about as well as she could before an audience that largely isn’t supportive of her, though she seemed to lack magnetism.
Circumstances were such that yesterday was Trump’s show to steal. And he did. But he fumbled away some of his gains in a rally at night.
Trump met with the Mexican president Nieto. It was definitely a gamble and could have turned out negatively. But it went very well for the Republican candidate. Following a private meeting, they appeared for a press conference with side-by-side podiums. This was Trump’s chance to look presidential on a foreign stage, and he did. So, a big morning plus for Trump.
But then he held his campaign rally in Arizona yesterday evening. He stuck pretty much to the topic — outlining his immigration policy. He did that successfully, too, and delivered the speech with passion. The large audience (typical for Trump) received his words enthusiastically. Fine so far.
But here’s where I think his hand was misplayed. He stuck to a hard-line, zero tolerance immigration plan. That’s okay, but he failed to interject the more moderate words he’s recently used. Lately, he’s been saying that he understands that some illegal immigrants have successfully integrated into American society and, having lived here for a decade or longer, they and their children should be given a chance to earn a break and remain. This new Trump approach had quickly been gaining support among moderates and women, making him seem more acceptable. If he’d included a few lines about this more moderate and conciliatory viewpoint — one that he’s recently expressed in a heartfelt way — I believe that would have worked better.
Now he risks an almost certain backtracking from Nieto, who is already faced with criticism for inviting Trump to Mexico and treating him diplomatically.
Anyway, we’ll see how this unfolds. Democrats are certain to attack Trump for his overly combative stand against illegal immigrants. And Trump is almost certain to bring back more moderate language when rephrasing his plan. Where it goes from there, we’ll have to wait and see. Temporarily, Trump has center stage and Clinton and her issues have somewhat gone out of focus.
In the latest polls, Trump has averaged surprisingly good gains.
→ See current odds (with links to other months)
