[Imbue]

His reasoning is actually quite flawed. Even if you believe there is somehow a black and white $7.7 trillion value difference between candidates, betting on such long odds still isn't rational.

If we assume (using numbers from the article) that a vote costs $20 (an hour of our time), the odds are 1 to 10 million, and the payoff is $7.7 trillion (even though it's the country getting the benefit, not the voter) then the Kelly criterion* implies that it's only rational to vote if your net worth is more than $200 million. Somebody making $20 an hour probably isn't worth $200 million, and so even if voting did have a positive expected value, it's not a rational strategy.

TL,DR: There is more to betting strategy than expected valve, and no rational gambler takes a bet with 1/10 million odds for $20.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion