"The fundamentals - the country's mood, the political cycle, the likely shape of the economy and the movement of certain constituencies like Latinos and young voters - all tilt Democratic.

Thus, lay down 7 to win 5 on a Democrat's taking the presidential oath of office 13 months from now, 2 to 1 that it's a Republican, and 20 to 1 on an independent or third-party candidate."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/23/america/letter.php

Of course they don't mention the strong Media bias which will favor the Dems. But anyways, that seems about right.
And they still give much better odds that Clinton wins:
"As of today, however, she's an underdog in Iowa, and her aura of inevitability is gone. Still, given all the vicissitudes, if you could bet on only one candidate, there is no stronger choice. The odds of Hillary Clinton's becoming the nation's 44th president: 3 to 1."

Which of course will be pretty depressing for just about everyone- except maybe the conservative talk radios. I think the odds generally give best predictor, but I don't know how much money is involved, if it's not a lot of money a few million dollars could used to change the odds. Another thing about the betting, could possible that some future candidate runs solely to make money from the betting [and takes a dive]. Which leads to another thing. Does Bill Clinton do much gambling? Maybe he has been betting against Ms earlier when there was a higher odds then destroys the campaign, then bets for Ms [and stops destroying the campaign] so he makes money whether she wins or loses. Yeah, it a weak theory, but anyhow.