Chances are high good that betting on the Biden/Trump contest will make the presidential election much more of a horse race.

Speculation about President Joe Biden’s future because the Democratic presidential candidate within the United States appears to be all over the place: on cable television, podcasts, social media and, perhaps unexpectedly, on foreign sports betting web sites.

After the primary 2024 presidential debate, lots of these web sites offered bets on whether Biden would stay within the race.

As a scholar of political communication And Sports mediawe examine how online betting platforms, typically related to sports, influence the US presidential election.

In our study of the 2020 and 2024 elections, we found that betting is greater than only a way for people to play with or take advantage of politics. Betting also highlights certain points of the electoral process and reflects people's understanding of those elections.

And while people take part in these games for various reasons, it’s also true that these bets flatten and simplify vital election issues. Consider a few of the bets offered by a platform before the recent presidential debate: “Will Donald Trump or Joe Biden swear live?” “Will Joe Biden’s age be mentioned during the debate?” and “Will the debate include a question about climate change?”

Betting on Biden

Foreign sports betting sites could also be surprising platforms for politics. Although sports betting has been legalized on the federal level within the United States, American sports betting firms usually are not permitted to supply bets on political events.

However, sportsbooks outside the United States offer bets on who will win a celebration's presidential nomination and which candidate will win the election. These bets also extend to presidential debates, where participants have the chance to predict the colour of a candidate's tie or who shall be the primary to take a sip of water.

These bets are organized in a menu and players can select which bets they need to position and the way much money they need to risk. Each selection is assigned odds that concurrently indicate the payout of a winning bet and its probability. Options marked with a negative sign usually tend to occur and can herald less money. A positive sign signifies that the choice will herald more cash since it is less likely.

For example, foreign sports betting providers corresponding to BetOnline.ag offer bets on whether Biden will resign before the Democratic Party Convention. Each option carries a unique risk and subsequently a unique reward.

These odds change repeatedly, but on July 8, a successful bet that Biden will resign would pay $3 for each dollar wagered – a profit of $2. Every dollar wagered that he is not going to resign would return $1.33, a profit of just $0.33. The site subsequently makes a financial assumption that Biden is more more likely to stay within the race.

The bets offered are based on the political context. During the 2020 US presidential election, a few of the most memorable bets focused on two issues that defined the political moment: the COVID-19 pandemic and widespread discussions about race and racism.

The politics of wearing masks

The first presidential debate of 2020 took place on September twenty ninth within the midst of a world pandemic. US authorities had mandated the wearing of masks in 33 states and on public transport.

Despite the recommendation of his own administration's experts, Trump held large rallies. Biden, however, held virtual meetings or small, socially distanced events attended mainly by journalists. Where Trump made fun of amongst those that wore a mask, Biden argues that that is one in all the “responsibilities of the people as Americans.”

In this context, two web sites invited players to position bets on whether the candidates would seem on stage wearing masks throughout the debate.

The odds that Biden would wear a mask were estimated at 69.2% and the percentages that he wouldn’t were estimated at 36.4%. Trump's odds that he would wear a mask were estimated at 20% and the percentages that he wouldn’t were estimated at 87.5%. The odds don’t add as much as 100% because betting sites set the percentages to maximise profits, no matter what consequence actually occurs.

These odds not only reflected how each candidate talked about and embodied competing views on mask-wearing and public health, but additionally simplified this complex scientific and political issue into two “yes” or “no” answers that might be bet on.

“Proud Boys” and race

Throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, betting web sites were capable of place quite a few bets on how Trump and Biden would speak about race. What they couldn't have predicted, nevertheless, was that the incumbent president would directly address white supremacists throughout the first debate.

When Biden called on Trump to sentence the Proud Boys, a far-right, white supremacist organization, replied: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.” Instead of condemning the group, the president effectively told the Proud Boys – and other white supremacist organizations – to face by.

Typically, sportsbooks have taken advantage of this post-debate exchange. For the second debate, Mybookie.ag asked bettors to think about whether or not Biden would reference a few of Trump's statements. This included betting on whether Biden would say “Proud Boys” – yes: 40.8% – or “racist” – yes: 75%.

The gambling web sites predicted that it was quite likely that Biden would sooner or later address Trump's statements from the sooner debate, but reduced the difficulty as to if Biden would simply mention the Proud Boys and admonish Trump with insults.

The 2024 elections and beyond

Four years later, foreign betting web sites proceed to scale back key political questions – corresponding to whether Biden should stay within the race – to easy, isolated events.

It's perhaps not surprising that sites typically dedicated to sports betting don't cover elections in a nuanced and in-depth manner, nevertheless it's vital to think about where and the way vital national conversations are going down.

While people play for various reasons and with different levels of political engagement, these sites reflect a superficial and polarized view of the present political situation. But that doesn't mean the sites can or should do otherwise.

But it’s price considering whether it is useful for the democratic process to once more portray the US elections as superficial, binary and controversial.