I think a good way to think about this is that if the election were held today, he would win. But there is a chance things can happen to swing it back in Harris' favor. Put duct tape over his mouth. Immediately.
Trump with 17 point lead in betting odds now. By far the largest he has had.....
- Thread starter -lowcountrydawg
- Start date
100% agreement, my feelings on why he should shut it down other than rallies:
- Media is in a panic and will all out assault anything he says and / or take everything out of context
- The Harris Campaign appears to be in a freefall and her chance of attracting moderates after the interview on Fox is less than slim
- Don't think anything Trump can say at this point to pull any true undecideds to his tent. More chance for Harris to push them to Trump
- He needs to simply turn up the early vote and rally his base.
- Vance does not need to do the Sunday shows, he has done his work. Interviewers will be even more unhinged. His time would be better spent in church or in one of the battle ground states.
Not saying its in the bag for Trump, but based on the hostility of the media and the dems he must be in the lead. Go to 4 corners, take him off twitter, let him play several rounds of golf daily with heavy security around him. He is in a whisker of reclaiming the Presidency, who would have thunk it when he left in January of 2020. I didn't and frankly hoped he would ride off into the sunset.
If he can stay out of his own way, the way he did last night answering this question...
...maybe duct tape won't be necessary 😆
This polymarket? The one that's paying influencers to promote the betting site? The one funded by peter thiel, Vance's Sugar Daddy? The same polymarket that didn't have walz as betting option for Kamala VP pick the day before she announced him?
Key takeway for polymarket: "What many fail to understand—or deliberately ignore—is that Polymarket odds are not data. They're driven by the whims of bettors, many of whom may be influenced by biases or even deliberate disinformation."
Key takeway for polymarket: "What many fail to understand—or deliberately ignore—is that Polymarket odds are not data. They're driven by the whims of bettors, many of whom may be influenced by biases or even deliberate disinformation."
I think you mean "advertise", just like Biden/Harris have paid "influencers" to promote their campaigns.
Meidas Touch? The "progressive" media company that started as a Liberal PAC? The one that formed in March 2020 with the purpose of stopping the reelection of Trump in 2020? Rolling Stone even profiled them and said they use "political persuasion to help Democrats win elections."
Excuse this rock-head if he doesn't hold their opinion on anthing conservative-related in high regard.
And Walz not being a betting options says more about that choice than it does polymarket.
Knew that was going to be the response. Attack the messenger but not the message.I think you mean "advertise", just like Biden/Harris have paid "influencers" to promote their campaigns.
Meidas Touch? The "progressive" media company that started as a Liberal PAC? The one that formed in March 2020 with the purpose of stopping the reelection of Trump in 2020? Rolling Stone even profiled them and said they use "political persuasion to help Democrats win elections."
Excuse this rock-head if he doesn't hold their opinion on anthing conservative-related in high regard.
And Walz not being a betting options says more about that choice than it does polymarket.
If y'all want to rely on the betting market as polling be my guest. They have been wrong way more than right.
Re: walz....it actually confirms that polymarket information doesn't mean jack, is nothing more than a gambling site and shouldn't be used as any sort of barometer for election results.
Hard to ignore as well no one was posting about problems with poly market when kamala was ahead.
Maybe people would go out and keep putting money on trump to change the odds.
Hold on, sir. Isn't that exactly what you're doing? You "attacked" the source, I simply turned the tables on you and did the same to your "source".
A betting site shows where people are willing to put their money. That's it. Who's "relying" on it? Its an interesting data point. Claiming that the site in question is manipulating something for political purposes would also suggest they would lose money to manipulate said data.
That would be weird and not standard for places that exist to make money. But, feel free to play the victim card, if that's all you have to rely on instead of making a logical argument.
Walz not being on the board shows you how out of left field the pick was. I don't think you know how these things work. He's shown why he was not a favorite....he's been a kooky, total disaster. It's why the campaign barely let's him do anything anymore.
In the same way sharps can move a line in football, you don’t think folks with more inside info (like maybe those with access to internal polls that have more money behind them and motivation be accurate) can move the odds here? I’ll say this - when it looked like Trump had the election last year it was the betting lines that moved and showed the way, because smart people with access to information knew the ballots yet to be counted would favor Biden in a big way. It’s not perfect but money cuts through bias and political motivation in a way that polls can’t.
