My Dad used to scold me for betting the hard ways at the craps tables. “That’s a sucker bet,” he lectured. The odds against double 2s, 3s, 4s, or 5s are in favor of the house with the high payoff being less than the actual risk.
Naturally, the first time I tried it, I won. Gleeful at disproving him, I continue to be a fan of hard way bets, which over time have generally, but not exclusively, proved my father right.
Longshots are called longshots for a reason. The smart money is always on the shorter odds where the payoff is less, but so is the risk. Of course, gambling is about taking chances, and it would be foolish to ignore the fact that sometimes the longshot hits. Betting on a longshot just because the odds are high is equally foolish, but understanding why the odds are high is the key to mitigating risk in pursuit of a big win.
Think of the 1968 New York Jets who were a longshot to win Super Bowl III. The odds were high only because it was mistakenly assumed that they played in an inferior league. The Denver Broncos were longshots to win Super Bowl XXXII, mostly because their prior disastrous history in the championship game created skeptics.
At other times, the odds are long because of an unknown quantity in the race. The 2022 Kentucky Derby was won by Rich Strike, an 80-1 longshot who only ran because another horse was scratched the day before, a reminder that the unknown is certainly frightening, but it is not by itself a reason to avoid taking a risk.
Just days away from the 2024 presidential election ,I had been staring at my ballot like a racing form with no good options. The odds of a positive outcome to this election seem so remote that I actively considered leaving my ballot blank for the first time.
Living in a state where the outcome is a foregone conclusion, I recognize that my vote is actually meaningless, but I fervently believe that exercising my right to vote is an affirmation of my faith in the principle of self-government. It is also a spiritual manifestation of the biblical commandment, “justice, justice alone shall you pursue,” which I have always understood as obligating voters to act as judges for the people.
With that weighing upon my soul, abstaining from this election felt like cowardice. A judgement had to be made even if the choices were bad.
I did not want to vote for Kamala Harris, but I did anyway. That’s not an endorsement as much as it is a concession to the reality that there was no other reasonable choice to make. I have no doubt that many readers will take offense at that assertion and wonder how it is that Donald Trump’s pro-Israel bona fides can be dismissed to choose Kamala Harris, who has only proved her ability to obfuscate on matters that are not political for us, but existential.
The reason is that the defining characteristic of Donald Trump’s entire life, from business to politics, has been to stick it to everyone who ever placed any faith or trust in him. If he can get you to believe him, he sees you as a sucker. He will betray your trust, almost reflexively, just to make it clear that you got suckered and that he outsmarted you by getting you to fall for his promises. That has always been the art of his deal.
If you believe that he will be a friend to Israel because he loves Netanyahu or because Miriam Adelson gave him $100 million or that he gives a fig for the evangelical Christians who support him, then prepare now for the Trump sucker treatment.
Trump already said openly that if he loses, Jews would be responsible for it. Trump knows very well that over 70% of American Jews will vote Democrat no matter what, so he is merely telegraphing his coming rage.
Kamala Harris’ primary campaign argument has been that she is not Donald Trump. In the end, it must be said that she was probably right to keep reminding me of this since it is the only reason I voted for her. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting that we should trust Kamala Harris to protect the Jewish community from the bully pulpit. While President Biden said that he ran for the office after seeing neo-Nazis march in Charlottesville, his would-be successor consistently praises the left-wing Brown Shirts whose protests have elevated anti-Jewish hatred to some kind of twisted, Sodom-like virtue. As furious as this makes me, why did I consider her the superior choice?
Beyond just this election, a Donald Trump victory creates a real danger that the lesson that will be learned by the Democratic party from defeat is that their mistake was a failure to lean in on anti-Israel rhetoric. The populist, progressive wing will make the argument that trying to lure Liz Cheney Republicans into the Democratic fold was an absurd waste while alienating the far-left base cost the party its chance to win.
By the same token, the most charitable thing that can be said about Kamala Harris is that she is a traditional politician. A Harris victory on Tuesday despite her abandonment by Muslims in Michigan and Progressives in other swing states will deal a substantial blow to their influence.
If moderates in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania deliver the White House for Harris, the chances that she shifts her policy positions to continue to appeal to these voters increases.
Admittedly, betting on Kamala Harris is a longshot. There is ample reason to fear the unknown with her candidacy, but politics is a gamble that involves risk, and fear is not by itself enough to stay out of the game. Sometimes the hard ways hit. The odds aren’t great, but with a choice between a surefire loser and a longshot winner, the choice in this election was pretty clear.