Political Betting Thread

[longway]

Yeah and that backfired in the worst possible way to an incoming impeachment lmao.

We see the world from opposite poles. Dnc part of the impeachment has been a dud, support declining, and it doesnt play that well in moderate districts.

If the dims are stupid enough to pass their motion up to the senate trump has his turn to present his case and disrupt the already embarrassing dnc primary process further. It will provide the perfect springboard to begin his re election campaign, as it will fire up his base and taint huges swathes of his opposition in the eyes of moderates and independents.

This impeachment is a gift.

 

[longway]

Looks like Buttigieg is a loser. You cant rebuild the Obama coalition with this kind of talk. I cant see any of the top 4 being able to beat Trump in the general.



Im actually a little surprised, i had him pegged as being a smart political operator.

 

[rev0lver]

We see the world from opposite poles. Dnc part of the impeachment has been a dud, support declining, and it doesnt play that well in moderate districts.

If the dims are stupid enough to pass their motion up to the senate trump has his turn to present his case and disrupt the already embarrassing dnc primary process further. It will provide the perfect springboard to begin his re election campaign, as it will fire up his base and taint huges swathes of his opposition in the eyes of moderates and independents.

This impeachment is a gift.

?? Impeachment support has been pretty steadily strong since October. Support for Trump's impeachment is higher than his approval rating.

The supposed issue with impeachment and moderate districts has been way overblown, and I hear it more from commentators who just don't want Trump to be impeached. For one thing, the actions by dems to bring the impeachment process forward created a hike in impeachment support by itself. When he gets impeached and the narrative sets in that the impeachment was appropriate, even more people will be agreeable to it. The support numbers are reactive to the process, as they are with a lot of things in politics. Secondly, I very highly doubt that people's election chances are based on whether or not a swing-district dem votes for the impeachment. That's far from the most important issue in the grand scheme of things, even if a number of voters weren't fully in support of it. I'm speculating here, but I'd bet most of the moderates who aren't in favor of impeachment aren't RAILING against impeachment as if it's a make-or-break issue. If anything, I've seen a lot more backlash to swing-district politicians like Jeff Van Drew who haven't been in favor of it.

When the process reaches the senate, a number of republican senators are going to be in the spotlight having to defend wrongdoing from the president. It's going to be worse for them. Trump and the right-wing media love to push this talking point that impeachment is bad for dems. Because they want the dems to drop the impeachment. Team Trump should be happy about the impeachment process if it's going to help them. But they haven't looked very happy.

 

[LiquidityTrap]

@Joedaman55

Another day, another Scott Adams prediction.

Today he says Buttigieg "took himself out of contention" by saying that anyone supporting Trump was looking the other way on racism at best. Says Buttigieg "can't be president, as of today".

 

[PlayswellwithLawnDarts]

Who wants to bet Pelosi has a dong?

 

[longway]

?? Impeachment support has been pretty steadily strong since October. Support for Trump's impeachment is higher than his approval rating.

The supposed issue with impeachment and moderate districts has been way overblown, and I hear it more from commentators who just don't want Trump to be impeached. For one thing, the actions by dems to bring the impeachment process forward created a hike in impeachment support by itself. When he gets impeached and the narrative sets in that the impeachment was appropriate, even more people will be agreeable to it. The support numbers are reactive to the process, as they are with a lot of things in politics. Secondly, I very highly doubt that people's election chances are based on whether or not a swing-district dem votes for the impeachment. That's far from the most important issue in the grand scheme of things, even if a number of voters weren't fully in support of it. I'm speculating here, but I'd bet most of the moderates who aren't in favor of impeachment aren't RAILING against impeachment as if it's a make-or-break issue. If anything, I've seen a lot more backlash to swing-district politicians like Jeff Van Drew who haven't been in favor of it.

When the process reaches the senate, a number of republican senators are going to be in the spotlight having to defend wrongdoing from the president. It's going to be worse for them. Trump and the right-wing media love to push this talking point that impeachment is bad for dems. Because they want the dems to drop the impeachment. Team Trump should be happy about the impeachment process if it's going to help them. But they haven't looked very happy.

I will guess will see. Its nice that we can see it play out over the next few months.I ts what i love about betting.

Imo the least worst option for the dems is censure.

Also want to point out that since support peaked when impeachment was first announced, support has clearly declined. its not a good sign for the dnc as the gop get to control the next step of the process. Trump approval is 95% with republican base, over 50% think he is a better prez than lincoln! Gop senators will not break ranks.

I just put another 5u on trump winning the general at +130, down from +150, totalling 15u now. Looks like people are beginning see how soft the line is.

 

[TrueAscension]

what's your reasoning for bloomberg winning?

He is an actual billionaire many times over with the resources to run a great campaign. He’s intelligent and will be running a simple but multi-pronged campaign that focuses on beating Trump touching on actual issues that effect his base. Instead of saying “hell yes we’re coming after your AR15s,” he’s talking about sensible gun legislation. He’s speaking to the youth and he’s also speaking to adults who have had enough of the childish antics of our current president whether they are impactful or not. A lot of Republicans aren’t snake bitten by the cultish nature of Trump who isn’t actually a republican at all. In fact in practice Bloomberg is much more of a republican than Trump is which is really interesting. He’s a middle of the road democrat not unlike Obama.

Also when Bloomberg debates Trump he’s going to make him look like a complete buffoon unlike Hillary who was completely lost.

Trump is going to get trounced... Bloomberg will thin the herd very very quickly and people you’ve all bet on to win the nomination will be dropping like flies because none of them can beat Trump.

 

[longway]

Can Obama run as VP? Assuming Buttigieg wins, him teaming up with Obama would beat Trump imo.

Assuming he cant, then buttigieg needs a VP in the realm of Obama's husband Michael to re-create the Obama coalition. 2 gay men would be a unique pair up for sure.

Buttigieg's VP pick would determine whther i cashed out of my trump bet or not.

 

[longway]

Evidence that impeachment plays badly in moderate districts and is not just a gop talking point.

 

[LiquidityTrap]

He is an actual billionaire many times over with the resources to run a great campaign. He’s intelligent and will be running a simple but multi-pronged campaign that focuses on beating Trump touching on actual issues that effect his base. Instead of saying “hell yes we’re coming after your AR15s,” he’s talking about sensible gun legislation. He’s speaking to the youth and he’s also speaking to adults who have had enough of the childish antics of our current president whether they are impactful or not. A lot of Republicans aren’t snake bitten by the cultish nature of Trump who isn’t actually a republican at all. In fact in practice Bloomberg is much more of a republican than Trump is which is really interesting. He’s a middle of the road democrat not unlike Obama.

Also when Bloomberg debates Trump he’s going to make him look like a complete buffoon unlike Hillary who was completely lost.

Trump is going to get trounced... Bloomberg will thin the herd very very quickly and people you’ve all bet on to win the nomination will be dropping like flies because none of them can beat Trump.

Post your bets bro

====================


This new Reuters/Ipsos national poll shows 31% undecided. The methodology seems iffy to me. It looks like these numbers come from the sample of (Democrats) + (Independents). I don't understand why Ipsos didn't further break independents down into Democrat-leaning independents and Republican-leaning independents and exclude the Republican leaners.

 

[TrueAscension]

Post your bets bro

====================


This new Reuters/Ipsos national poll shows 31% undecided. The methodology seems iffy to me. It looks like these numbers come from the sample of (Democrats) + (Independents). I don't understand why Ipsos didn't further break independents down into Democrat-leaning independents and Republican-leaning independents and exclude the Republican leaners.

I've posted plenty of my UFC bets but I don't wager on politics. That doesn't discount the validity of my opinion/post.

 

[longway]

Post your bets bro

====================


This new Reuters/Ipsos national poll shows 31% undecided. The methodology seems iffy to me. It looks like these numbers come from the sample of (Democrats) + (Independents). I don't understand why Ipsos didn't further break independents down into Democrat-leaning independents and Republican-leaning independents and exclude the Republican leaners.

I think its between biden, buttigieg and bloomberg. Bernie will not be allowed to win without orchestrating a coup in the convention, but thats unlikely.

 

[LiquidityTrap]

I think its between biden, buttigieg and bloomberg. Bernie will not be allowed to win without orchestrating a coup in the convention, but thats unlikely.

Disagree on the last point.

I've been writing this for almost a year now: I think if Sanders wins a plurality of delegates on the first ballot, he can't be denied. That would be political suicide for the Democrats as a large segment of Sanders voters would boycott the Democratic Party in 2020.

 

[longway]

Disagree on the last point.

I've been writing this for almost a year now: I think if Sanders wins a plurality of delegates on the first ballot, he can't be denied. That would be political suicide for the Democrats as a large segment of Sanders voters would boycott the Democratic Party in 2020.

The problem is there is a civil war in the dnc. Ok you may call it a fracture. Sanders has thrown his lot in with the progessives. Fuckwitillary even implied bernie was a russian plant on stern, thats how much he is feared.

Just let that sink in. a major dnc figure has accused the sitting president and 2 dnc primary candidates of being russian assets, and the dnc dont disown her and go with her narrative. Just understand how batshit crazy this is.

They know that sanders most likely wont win anyway, and it puts progeesives in the drivers seat in the dnc, so whats the benefit for the power brokers?

The current establishment will protect their hold on power in the dnc at all costs; donors will not allow a sanders nomination if there is any way to stop it.

In the primary, the problem is that bloomberg could prevent buttigieg rising. This could allow biden to win by default. We have to wait jan to know for sure, as thats when dnc primary voters will wake up and really pay attention, but biden's 'gaffes' may already be baked in.

Then they will have to put the boot in to destroy his candidacy and that has its own risks.

I think i will put a unit on bloomberg as his money could well sustain a further rise, most likely at buttigiegs cost.

If biden doesnt tank by jan then i will bank my profits.

 

[LiquidityTrap]

Just let that sink in. a major dnc figure has accused the sitting president and 2 dnc primary candidates of being russian assets, and the dnc dont disown her and go with her narrative. Just understand how batshit crazy this is.

HRC said that Gabbard is the "favorite of the Russians" and that Jill Stein is a Russian asset. If one listens carefully to the recording, it's not obvious she said that Gabbard is a Russian asset. Nevertheless, there are second-order effects there as supporters of each side dig in their heels so point taken.

The problem is there is a civil war in the dnc. Ok you may call it a fracture. Sanders has thrown his lot in with the progessives. Fuckwitillary even implied bernie was a russian plant on stern, thats how much he is feared.

I don't think she said Sanders is a "Russian plant". I think she was saying the Russian state wanted to boost Sanders at Clinton's expense in the 2016 primary. Same 2nd-order point as above though.

They know that sanders most likely wont win anyway, and it puts progeesives in the drivers seat in the dnc, so whats the benefit for the power brokers?

The current establishment will protect their hold on power in the dnc at all costs; donors will not allow a sanders nomination if there is any way to stop it.

I'm saying the problem with this line of thinking is that it assume that the DNC would rather lose in 2020 (due to mass exodus of Sanders people) than nominate Sanders. I think that's unlikely.

In the primary, the problem is that bloomberg could prevent buttigieg rising.

I've considered it. I think one way this could happen is by "crowding out" ad buys. Bloomberg's ad budget is astronomical. I still feel he will hurt Biden more.

 

[rev0lver]

Also want to point out that since support peaked when impeachment was first announced, support has clearly declined. its not a good sign for the dnc as the gop get to control the next step of the process. Trump approval is 95% with republican base, over 50% think he is a better prez than lincoln! Gop senators will not break ranks.

I've seen individual polls that have been all over the place, but impeachment has held steady overall. It peaked at 50%, and has sat at 48-49% since then. I guess that's a decline but nothing significant. It's about 7-8 points higher than Trump's overall approval rating.

Side note - I saw that story on repubs rating him higher than Lincoln and that's absolutely insane to me lol. I thought it was fake at first.

Evidence that impeachment plays badly in moderate districts and is not just a gop talking point.

I have no doubt that swing districts are less favorable to impeachment than left-wing districts. But that poll kinda proves my point here lol. 60% of those surveyed are between "no impact on vote" and "support impeachment". That's far greater than her election polling itself, and tells me a "yes" vote on impeachment wouldn't have any impact on her election.Her constituents opposing that are people who weren't going to vote for her anyway. It's not a deciding issue for voters, though a "no" vote could hurt the energy of her dem base that needs to show a big turnout.

 

[rev0lver]

He is an actual billionaire many times over with the resources to run a great campaign. He’s intelligent and will be running a simple but multi-pronged campaign that focuses on beating Trump touching on actual issues that effect his base. Instead of saying “hell yes we’re coming after your AR15s,” he’s talking about sensible gun legislation. He’s speaking to the youth and he’s also speaking to adults who have had enough of the childish antics of our current president whether they are impactful or not. A lot of Republicans aren’t snake bitten by the cultish nature of Trump who isn’t actually a republican at all. In fact in practice Bloomberg is much more of a republican than Trump is which is really interesting. He’s a middle of the road democrat not unlike Obama.

Also when Bloomberg debates Trump he’s going to make him look like a complete buffoon unlike Hillary who was completely lost.

Trump is going to get trounced... Bloomberg will thin the herd very very quickly and people you’ve all bet on to win the nomination will be dropping like flies because none of them can beat Trump.

I totally disagree with this. I think this would be a good point in like 2004, but not the case anymore. Huge portions of the democratic base hate the idea of people buying their way into the election. Big money might not work like it used to, with Warren+Sanders outraising the field with small donors. Bloomberg's platform doesn't even differentiate itself enough from the moderates, and he has virtually nothing to spark some sort of populist movement to build a big base in a crowded field. These moderate tactics are the exact opposite of a winning strategy here imo.

Hillary destroyed Trump in the debates lol. It wasn't a difficult thing to do. Trump just spouts word salads and looks like an idiot when he's challenged on anything. The right-wing media just always scrambled to spin it into some sort of win for him, which they'll do no matter what. I have no doubt Bloomberg could also destroy Trump in a debate, as any dem in this field would do. Except maybe Biden because he's a god-awful debater who I remember looking terrible in VP debates against Paul Ryan.

On you mentioning Obama, yes I agree he was a middle of the road dem. But I don't like how people forget how Obama ran his campaign. In 2008, a year that saw far less left-wing support on some mainstream issues we have now, he ran as a hard left populist that everyone on the right decried as a socialist who will destroy America. He beat an extremely good candidate in McCain and won by a big margin. Somehow we're acting like this is the wrong move now.

 

[rev0lver]

Disagree on the last point.

I've been writing this for almost a year now: I think if Sanders wins a plurality of delegates on the first ballot, he can't be denied. That would be political suicide for the Democrats as a large segment of Sanders voters would boycott the Democratic Party in 2020.

I think this is possible. It's no secret that the DNC does not want Bernie Sanders to be the nominee. But I think they're self-serving more than they're stupid. If Bernie wins a plurality, they might have to realize that shifting their narrative to go all-in on Sanders will be better for the election than making an enemy of huge swathes of their base. The republicans did this in a way with Trump. Let's not forget how anti-Trump most of the republican establishment was until it became clear he'd win the primary. Then they did a complete 180 to unite the base for Trump, and it worked extremely well.

 

[Joedaman55]

@Joedaman55

Another day, another Scott Adams prediction.

Today he says Buttigieg "took himself out of contention" by saying that anyone supporting Trump was looking the other way on racism at best. Says Buttigieg "can't be president, as of today".

It’s pretty bad, will hurt him with a lot of voters in the middle that voted for Trump last election.

 

[LiquidityTrap]

It’s pretty bad, will hurt him with a lot of voters in the middle that voted for Trump last election.

Maybe and maybe not, but Adams is being way too confident imo. He's also holding out hope that Harris will still become the nominee through a backdoor. To me the guy just thinks way too highly of his political handicapping abilities. Overall he's a smart and interesting guy though.