Election Betting Odds

[John Clark]

Election Betting Odds says  Trump has a 60% chance of winning, I hate to say it but I think that's about right. The polls say it's dead even but in 2020 Trump did better than the polls said he would, and in 2016 he did MUCH better, probably because Trump fans are embarrassed to admit that they are going to vote for Trump. I'd be embarrassed too if I was going to vote for Trump. I think the same thing is gonna happen this time, and I sure hope I'm wrong.  

Election Betting Odds

John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis

ebo

[Alan Grayson]

On Tuesday, October 22, 2024 at 6:28:52 AM UTC-6 John Clark wrote:

Election Betting Odds says  Trump has a 60% chance of winning, I hate to say it but I think that's about right. The polls say it's dead even but in 2020 Trump did better than the polls said he would, and in 2016 he did MUCH better, probably because Trump fans are embarrassed to admit that they are going to vote for Trump. I'd be embarrassed too if I was going to vote for Trump. I think the same thing is gonna happen this time, and I sure hope I'm wrong.  

Election Betting Odds

 

Democrats are generally nervous because Kamala has, if you believe the polls, lost ground to Trump since her initial surge. I am among the nervous D's. However, I take some comfort in the fact that more women are registered to vote than men, and it's hard for me to believe that they won't strongly tend to deny POTUS status to Trump, given the abortion issue. AG 

[Cosmin Visan]

@Alan. Why do you want to exterminate normal white men ? You imagine that you will be spared if you be their dogie ? Then you imagine that with so many women around you will have unlimited orgies ?

[John Clark]

About those those betting odds, I found out something new today, the odds may have been manipulated. In today's New York Times I read this: 

"Mr. Trump’s apparent lead may be an illusion. The odds on Polymarket began favoring him this month after just four accounts, with user names like Fredi9999 and PrincessCaro, bet more than $30 million on a Trump victory, according to an analysis of transaction records by Chaos Labs, a crypto data provider. Polymarket said on Thursday that all four accounts were controlled by one person, whom it described as a French national with a financial services background, without revealing the person’s identity.

The election betting has placed enormous scrutiny on Polymarket, a start-up based in New York that allows people to wager crypto on everything from sports to Taylor Swift’s romantic prospects. The start-up, which is backed by an investment firm of the conservative tech mogul Peter Thiel, a strong Trump supporter. The bets that bolstered Mr. Trump’s odds have raised alarms that Polymarket could be vulnerable to manipulation. The trader who placed the wagers might have been “willing to take the losses in order to change public perceptions,” said Rajiv Sethi, an economics professor at Barnard College. “And possibly have an effect on things like donations and morale and volunteer support and turnout.” "

John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis

dtt

[PGC]

On Friday, October 25, 2024 at 1:43:21 PM UTC+2 John Clark wrote:

About those those betting odds, I found out something new today, the odds may have been manipulated. In today's New York Times I read this: 

"Mr. Trump’s apparent lead may be an illusion. The odds on Polymarket began favoring him this month after just four accounts, with user names like Fredi9999 and PrincessCaro, bet more than $30 million on a Trump victory, according to an analysis of transaction records by Chaos Labs, a crypto data provider. Polymarket said on Thursday that all four accounts were controlled by one person, whom it described as a French national with a financial services background, without revealing the person’s identity.

The election betting has placed enormous scrutiny on Polymarket, a start-up based in New York that allows people to wager crypto on everything from sports to Taylor Swift’s romantic prospects. The start-up, which is backed by an investment firm of the conservative tech mogul Peter Thiel, a strong Trump supporter. The bets that bolstered Mr. Trump’s odds have raised alarms that Polymarket could be vulnerable to manipulation. The trader who placed the wagers might have been “willing to take the losses in order to change public perceptions,” said Rajiv Sethi, an economics professor at Barnard College. “And possibly have an effect on things like donations and morale and volunteer support and turnout.” "

Thanks for the update. In 2016, the betting odds would have had to favor Clinton. So grain of salt, even before the update you brought to our attention here. Recent developments highlight the Democratic Party's challenges in confronting Donald Trump's enduring appeal. The manipulation of betting odds on platforms like Polymarket—where a single person significantly influenced perceptions by placing large bets favoring Trump—demonstrates again how easily narratives can be distorted, potentially affecting voter morale, donations, and turnout.

Kamala Harris appears to struggle with emotionally resonating with voters, an area where Trump has historically excelled. Trump's 2016 victory defied conventional wisdom; he won not through detailed policies but by embodying a maverick persona promising to disrupt the status quo. He tapped into voter frustrations, building a loyal base resistant to traditional political attacks.

Harris faces skepticism due to several factors. Incumbency suggests continuity, which may not satisfy voters hungry for change. She also struggles to differentiate herself from President Biden's administration while maintaining Democratic support. There's a disconnect between her messaging and the emotional nature of Trump's support. Her philosophical arguments against authoritarianism, citing Trump's alleged fascist tendencies and testimonies from his former staff, don't resonate with his base, who often dismiss such characterizations as typical political attacks. As we see on our list: arguments don't work on folks with emotional biases. MAGA pride seems tough for her to crack. That's why I thought they should've used the Convention to select somebody "new". That lack of perceived freshness is not mitigated by statements like: "I'm not Joe Biden.", which seem more like a concession/justification that she stands for "more of the same". 

Moreover, Harris's shift toward the political center to appeal broadly may erode the little authenticity she has. Voters seek clarity and consistency; sudden shifts can cause confusion about her true stance. In contrast, Trump's messaging remains consistent bullshit/misinformation, reinforcing his connection with supporters that politics is just a stage/game anyway; and that the content of candidates' statements are all merely propagandistic and without substance. Another hurdle is Harris's ability to communicate tangible benefits to the average voter, especially regarding economic issues like purchasing power and middle-class prosperity. Without effectively demonstrating how her policies would improve lives—despite potential congressional opposition—she may fail to inspire confidence among undecided voters. We saw how "Not Trump" backfired for Hillary. Why are we seeing this ineffective approach again?

Additionally, Harris lacks the charisma and rhetorical prowess of figures like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, which could hinder her ability to galvanize support in a media-saturated environment where personal appeal is crucial. Trump's steadfast base presents a formidable challenge; his supporters remain loyal despite facts/evidence, including his legal. Logical arguments and highlighting his criminal status have little impact, as their support is rooted in emotional and cultural identification - as misguided and ill-defined as they may be (see prevalence of failure to understand that alleged "wokeness" is a distraction designed to manipulate societal regression, and not a substantive, coherent idea based on evidence or theory) - rather than policy agreements or ethical considerations. Losing minority votes due to her being perceived as the "woke communist" demonstrates an inability to disarm this nonsense by her campaign.

Given these factors, skepticism about the Democrats' prospects seems warranted. The combination of incumbency-associated stagnation perception, ineffective emotional engagement, strategic shifts that undermine authenticity, and messaging that fails to address immediate economic concerns creates a challenging landscape for Harris's campaign. 

Ultimately, Harris's effectiveness hinges on overcoming these obstacles and connecting with voters on both rational and emotional levels. I feel that without significant adjustments, Democrats may struggle to counter Trump's entrenched support and address the electorate's desire for change, casting doubt on their prospects for electoral success. Of course this is just speculative on my part.

 

[Cosmin Visan]

When weirdos invaded all movies, games, schools, corporations, too say there is no evidence is to be a weirdo wokie yourself.

[Giulio Prisco]

To me, this thing is a 50% coin toss. I don't trust the partisan
propaganda of the two main parties, and I don't trust the betting
markets, which are still too small to be impermeable to manipulation.
So I think either of the two main candidates could win, by a small or
a big margin. Who wins will be known soon enough, though if the margin
is small then the losers will say that the winners have stolen the
elections. So I won't waste too much time thinking about this, please
write to me in a few weeks and tell me who won.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "extropolis" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to extropolis+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/extropolis/CAJPayv1iUh2iA7BsxWEEQdaZ-y%3DE5vMc4dtrQM%3DmSVcWoX0LvQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[John Clark]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 10:30 AM Giulio Prisco <giu...@gmail.com> wrote:

 > if the margins are small then the losers will say that the winners have stolen the elections.

That is only half true. If Harris loses she will say she lost fair and square, just like every losing presidential candidate in the history of the country has said, with the obvious exception of convicted felon Donald Trump in 2020. But if Hitler loving Donald Trump loses the election then there is a 100% chance he will claim the election was crooked. In fact even if fascist Donald wins by a landslide he will STILL say the election was crooked because he should've won by an even larger margin. Remember this is the same guy who claimed but the election for the Emmy Awards were crooked because his crappy game show didn't win a prize.  

 John K Clark 

[Cosmin Visan]

I would actually like that female to win, so America can finally succumb to communism. I will have a good laugh.

[Brent Meeker]

@Cosmin.  Why are you so into projection?  As a computer program you can't couple with women.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3c89e39c-10a4-49fd-9f49-e09a007fce11n%40googlegroups.com.

[Brent Meeker]

Shifting the poles to a tie or even a narrow Trump lead, would increase the turnout on the D side, which would be contrary to Thiel's declared interest.  Of course I think Trump is contrary to Thiel's actual interests.  Isn't he gay?

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1mpNnACdfkhibmS6GLMutFS32mMXUQ_Gb4YXEsYqnVcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Brent Meeker]

On 10/25/2024 7:30 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote:
> To me, this thing is a 50% coin toss. I don't trust the partisan
> propaganda of the two main parties, and I don't trust the betting
> markets, which are still too small to be impermeable to manipulation.
> So I think either of the two main candidates could win, by a small or
> a big margin. Who wins will be known soon enough, though if the margin
> is small then the losers will say that the winners have stolen the
> elections.

If Trump loses the Republicans will say the election has been
stolen...regardless of the margin.

Brent

[Brent Meeker]

On 10/25/2024 9:49 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:

I would actually like that female to win, so America can finally succumb to communism. I will have a good laugh.

That's funny, all communist countries have had male dictators.  While democractic countries have had female leaders.  But then you seldom seem informed.

Brent

On Friday 25 October 2024 at 19:07:09 UTC+3 John Clark wrote:

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 10:30 AM Giulio Prisco <giu...@gmail.com> wrote:

 > if the margins are small then the losers will say that the winners have stolen the elections.

That is only half true. If Harris loses she will say she lost fair and square, just like every losing presidential candidate in the history of the country has said, with the obvious exception of convicted felon Donald Trump in 2020. But if Hitler loving Donald Trump loses the election then there is a 100% chance he will claim the election was crooked. In fact even if fascist Donald wins by a landslide he will STILL say the election was crooked because he should've won by an even larger margin. Remember this is the same guy who claimed but the election for the Emmy Awards were crooked because his crappy game show didn't win a prize.  

 John K Clark 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bdec2577-6dd9-4912-87cf-1caf8d4af204n%40googlegroups.com.

[Cosmin Visan]

America is progressive, is all for gender swap. So it will have a strong and independent childless female dictator.

[Brent Meeker]

At least it won't be an ignorant, narcissitic dictator. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/32dc4456-e373-41b8-ba81-6409d9e39050n%40googlegroups.com.

[ilsa]

Where do I get hemlock?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ae435624-1d58-4f04-8ce1-54b802df5b38%40gmail.com.