Today at lunch, I bet Nathaniel Bechhofer $50 at even odds that Trump will not officially concede the election by Saturday, November 12, at 12:01 AM Eastern Standard time. I win if there’s no concession by that time; Nathaniel wins otherwise.
Nov 8 2016
President Obama has been campaigning hard in recent days. He's told his supporters that he needs them to vote, in order to preserve his legacy. That's probably because Donald Trump has promised to undo almost every single significant policy initiative of the Obama Administration. In recent polls, Obama's approval r...
Nov 7 2016
People often use the GDP formula to erroneously derive conclusions about economic causation. For example, in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, some proponents of "stimulus" spending argued that a boost in government spending on infrastructure would obviously raise GDP because the textbooks tell us that GDP = C ...
Nov 7 2016
Today at lunch, I bet Nathaniel Bechhofer $50 at even odds that Trump will not officially concede the election by Saturday, November 12, at 12:01 AM Eastern Standard time. I win if there's no concession by that time; Nathaniel wins otherwise.
READER COMMENTS
Bill
Nov 7 2016 at 2:06pm
Nice. If Trump does not concede because he wins, do you still get the $50?
Scott Sumner
Nov 7 2016 at 3:03pm
That’s a rare case where I think you’ll lose.
Jeff G.
Nov 7 2016 at 3:49pm
I would take the same side but can you explain why you took that position?
Michael
Nov 7 2016 at 4:16pm
agree wit Scott. What happened to why you win your bets
[Broken HTML fixed. –Econlib Ed.]
Peter H
Nov 7 2016 at 4:37pm
Smart bet. There’s no such thing as “officially” conceding an election, so you virtually can’t lose if you’re very pedantic about it.
If you’re not being pedantic and want to offer Nathaniel a fair bet, I’d make it contingent on a public address where he describes Clinton as the “President-elect” or congratulates her on having been elected.
Philo
Nov 7 2016 at 4:40pm
What did prompt you to make this bet (other than your personal insight into Trumpian psychology)?
Andrew_FL
Nov 7 2016 at 7:28pm
@Philo-He’s kinda telegraphed that he may?
I think Bryan is making one of his rare risky bets, betting against the majority of historical precedent, which is usually the opposite of what he’d do.
I’ll say that if ever there was a candidate who would break with the majority of historical precedent, it would be Trump.
(I assume they’re both confident the result will not be close, as, in the event that the election came down to a small number of votes, the loser would arguably be justified in contesting the results)
(Note that, in 2012, Florida’s vote count was not official until November 20th)
Also I just realized that if Trump wins, Bryan wins his bet by the wording. Intentional?
Thomas
Nov 8 2016 at 1:15am
There’s roughly a 30% chance that Trump wins, so this is a bet that, in the other cases (70%), a little less than a third of the outcomes involve Trump refusing to concede by Saturday. Not a crazy bet.
Phil
Nov 8 2016 at 9:41am
I’d be curious as to whether you explain you logic with the people you bet with prior to making it
Did Nathaniel Bechhofer have access to the full extent of the logic behind your thinking about the bet, prior to agreeing to it?
Mark Bahner
Nov 8 2016 at 12:34pm
Yes, here’s one definition of “concede”:
If he wins, it seems to me he absolutely does “concede.” He’ll of course say the election was fair if he wins. So I think Bryan loses if Trump wins.
Mark
Nov 9 2016 at 7:01am
You won!
austrartsua
Nov 9 2016 at 9:00am
Lol. The irony!
phil
Nov 9 2016 at 4:18pm
well done, you had this pegged better than I did
Comments are closed.