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.
some people are going to have a real awakening on Wednesday, November 6
Yea cause the polls have been very accurate? lol
Question. Has anyone here actually voted in one of these polls on or know anyone who has? I don’t. Of course most of the people I associate with are pretty busy with their jobs
Last edited:
Orange man about to wipe the floor with that ho.....................
I accused you of attacking meidas and not the actual content they provided. I never attacked the person that tweeted the info (messenger), I attacked polymarket (the mesage). Your accusation is off base.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.
This betting site is offshore. It takes in money from all over the world. It doesn't mean anything in regards to how this election is going to turn out.
Walz was a name that was buzzing a few days before she picked him... and polymarket didn't even have him on the board. Goes to show it is not a good indication of polling. If they are so tuned in with the data, why wasn't he on the board to bet on?
Collegiate polls have shown a shift away from Harris the last week and a half. All polls still within the margin of error, so anything can happen.
Still hard to believe the 2 candidates for the highest office in the land continue to do their own self harm by running their mouth.
Still hard to believe the 2 candidates for the highest office in the land continue to do their own self harm by running their mouth.
Here’s what’s even more disappointing, it will never get any better than that with him.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.
I think Trump did well this week with Harris Faulkner and Telemundo.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...tock-markets-bet-to-win-the-election-4e0a1b76
I wouldn't empty the savings account just yet. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...tock-markets-bet-to-win-the-election-4e0a1b76
Last edited:
I posted about this a few weeks ago, in my lifetime, don't think i have seen so many folks supporting each candidate so confident in their candidate winning this late in the election cycle.
2012 - We knew Obama was going to win
2016 - Most everyone, including Trump thought Clinton was going to win
2020 - Polls had Biden way ahead and at this point in the polls, although he lost ground late the outcome was not surprising
I could go back further, but not much different than the last 12 years. I'm a Trump voter (not necessarily a supporter) and he certainly looks like he is in the drivers seat. I know anything could happen, so I'll sit back and watch but there is going to be shock and dismay from one side about 11:30 pm on election night. That does bother me.
Harris could win but I think something needs to happen between now and Election Day for that to happen. The trend and likely turnout given state of inflation / economy for low / middle America is a nearly impossible bar for an incumbent to overcome. Writing is on the wall. Without a big shift in momentum trump is gonna win. Maybe really big.
If you are planning on placing a wager, you may want to look into what moved Polymarket so much.
I figured it was manipulation, but it was only a gut feeling. Good to see a credible source suggest the same.
Thiel and Musk could look at this as just another campaign contribution and the dollars involved are meaningless to them.
Your logic here is non-existent and unsurprisingly circular:
- You attacked polymarket, due to the 'content' they provided, even referring to Thiel as a "Sugar Daddy" (i.e. "attacking polymarket, not the actual content they provided")
- You indicated that a company that chooses to advertise, somehow makes them 'bad'
(i.e. "attacking polymarket, not the actual content they provided")
- You used a known far-left, former Democratic PAC as some reputable source for your illogical claims and call foul when I point out they might not be the best source. They are blatantly biased. The most basic step of judging any argument is to study the source of the data used. Crying foul because I questioned your source is the death rattle of a poorly constructed argument.
Why is noting where and how people betting their own money not a valid data point? Who cares if it's offshore? Who cares who owns it? How would polymarket manipulating who is betting on what help Trump/Vance? What is your ultimate point? That you don't like the information? Why does anybody ever care about the spread on a football game? Because it's a valid data point. Nobody claims that it effects the outcome of a game. Your argument is both shallow and incoherent.
- The only thing that polymarket not having Walz on their board indicates is that there was no money to be made by adding him to it. It's not a poll. It's a betting site. What is so hard to understand? Is your memory so short that you cannot recall the literal shock that Harris chose Walz instead of Shapiro?
That's a lot of money for someone to bet just to affect a narrative. Isn't it more logical that somebody thinks they can make a lot of money on this, one way or another?
Musk and Thiel are all-in on supporting Trump and Vance. Musk is the wealthiest guy on the planet and Theil is worth almost $10b.
If Musk placed all of these wagers adding up to $30m, that would represent approximately 0.0125% of his current net worth. That's the definition of inconsequential. US government contracts and subsidies have played a massive role in Elon's success. If a $30m bet has any chance of paying off with a new Trump administration, that is a layup.
Last edited:
Okay, now do Democrat over-sampling in polls. What's the point here? polymarket isn't going to affect the election. If it's being used in similar fashion to a poll...all this does is make it a less reliable one.
Agreed. If this specific betting market moved in a vacuum without anything else changing will might have a point. But every poll has seemingly moved in one direction in a pretty big way relative to the general non-movement in recent months. And the average of all betting markets is now 60/40. There are several weeks where a lot can happen particularly when trump is involved. But a 60/40 this far out is significant. If nothing changes from a polling standpoint I would expect the 60/40 to be more like 75/25 on Election Day.
Sounds like you need to head to Vegas and place your bets. Trump is practically a lock!
EDIT: I don't know why I didn't check this out earlier. Guess who one of the lead investors is in Polymarket? None other than Peter Thiel himself. That's the same Peter Thiel who JD Vance worked for when he was at Thiel's Venture firm and who provided one of the single largest ($15m) donations ever to a Senate race during JD's campaign.
I'm sure it's all a coincidence, but if a Dem candidate had these kinds of direct ties to George Soros, people would be losing their minds.
Last edited:
Heels up Harris is the one that needs duct tape. A more annoying voice tone with meaningless lies does not help her
Good idea. My bookie doesn’t have political stuff but then again I suspect there is enough riding already financially on this election.
A Trump win will make both of us a lot of money……bet or no bet.
I think a Trump win will be the costliest in our history, and I'm talking about a lot more than just money, although he will cost us a lot of that as well.
That was addressed above. But, I'll repeat: Who cares? It's a betting site. What possible impact does this have?
Soros buying DA's & the like has a definitive impact that a betting site could obviously never have. This entire logic train about who invested in a betting site is derailing into stupidity. Trying to equate this to Soros is ignoring what he's actually investing in.
