The War Room Bet Thread V3

[Jack V Savage]

@Lead

Time to bring in the bosses. That weasel just won't concede.

Why not wait until the information is out? The rushing here seems strange to me. Like I said, I suspect that it's a deliberate strategy (banking on first, uninformed impressions settling in) by the GOP, and it seems to have worked on people who think the Daily Caller and Breitbart are legitimate news.

 

[waiguoren]

Proving it to legal satisfaction is obviously much harder than to a kind of common-sense standard.

This is a strawman. We aren't talking about 'proving it to legal satisfaction'. We are talking about whether or not Mueller will conclude that your conspiracy theory holds water. I seriously, seriously doubt that your conspiracy theory is accurate and since I think Mueller is pretty objective I think his report will not find your conspiracy theory to be accurate.

 

[waiguoren]

Why not wait until the information is out? The rushing here seems strange to me. Like I said, I suspect that it's a deliberate strategy (banking on first, uninformed impressions settling in) by the GOP, and it seems to have worked on people who think the Daily Caller and Breitbart are legitimate news.

Lots of stupidity here. It's pretty clear you didn't even read the terms of the bet. The bet settles as soon as the Mueller investigation concludes. If Mueller doesn't indict Donald Trump Sr., I win. The DOJ has already stated that there are no new indictments, so I already won the bet. The delaying on the part of @PolishHeadlock is just dishonorable.

 

[Jack V Savage]

This is a strawman. We aren't talking about 'proving it to legal satisfaction'. We are talking about whether or not Mueller will conclude that your conspiracy theory holds water. I seriously, seriously doubt that your conspiracy theory is accurate and since I think Mueller is pretty objective I think his report will not find your conspiracy theory to be accurate.

I think you're trying to stretch to describe obvious, well-known facts as "conspiracy theories," which is pretty dishonest, you have to admit. Anyway, publicly available info already makes it pretty clear that the meeting was about trading illegal interference for policy concessions. Not sure if there's anything more to support it.

 

[waiguoren]

publicly available info already makes it pretty clear that the meeting was about trading illegal interference for policy concessions

Even this is a stretch. Regardless, your assumption that an actual exchange took place is totally unfounded and falls squarely into the 'conspiracy theory' camp.

Aren't you already betting on Trump's re-election?

Yes. I'll happily double up with you.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Even this is a stretch. Regardless, your assumption that an actual exchange took place is totally unfounded and falls squarely into the 'conspiracy theory' camp.

Not if you're trying to be honest, though.

Yes. I'll happily double up with you.

Well, like I said, I'd like to take advantage of your wishful thinking here, but realistically, based on current info, this can go either way.

Too bad you weren't serious about your claim that you thought that the Mueller report going out would boost Trump in the polls.

 

[waiguoren]

Not if you're trying to be honest, though.

Wrong.

Too bad you weren't serious about your claim that you thought that the Mueller report going out would boost Trump in the polls.

I'm totally serious about it. As I stated from the beginning, I predict that Trump's RCP average will increase by at least 1.5% over the next nine days. That would put him at or near historic highs. He's getting a significant boost from the conclusion of the Mueller probe.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Wrong.

I'm totally serious about it. As I stated from the beginning, I predict that Trump's RCP average will increase by at least 1.5% over the next nine days. That would put him at or near historic highs. He's getting a significant boost from the conclusion of the Mueller probe.

Again, you were previously willing to bet that Trump's approval rating would go over 50% (!), which was, to be honest, pure wishful thinking on your part. Now you're just saying that it'll fluctuate normally, which could very well be wrong (or the direction could be wrong), but isn't worth betting on.

And, no, it's not wrong. Your approach here is to try to dishonestly associate reasonable speculation based on available evidence with stuff like Austrianism or climate-science denial rather than to seriously engage. It's obvious propaganda.

 

[waiguoren]

@Lead

Time to settle this. The coward will not show his face.

@Jack V Savage say hello to the new champion. You had a good run. This new generation is just operating at an entirely different level.

 

[waiguoren]

Now you're just saying that it'll fluctuate normally

False. Trump has only reached 44% six times in his presidency. The 'normal' fluctuation would be for Trump's approval to decline at this time. Instead, I am predicting it will *increase*.

Again, you were previously willing to bet that Trump's approval rating would go over 50%

That's possible. I don't recall the exact exchange. Actually, I will take that bet now if you want it. The problem is that you will be too lazy to write up a careful bet, just like last time.

And, no, it's not wrong. Your approach here is to try to dishonestly associate reasonable speculation based on available evidence with stuff like Austrianism or climate-science denial rather than to seriously engage. It's obvious propaganda.

This deserves no response. It's really dumb. Propaganda? Who is my audience? Did you think before you wrote this?

 

[Lead]

@Lead

Time to settle this. The coward will not show his face.

@Jack V Savage say hello to the new champion. You had a good run. This new generation is just operating at an entirely different level.

We haven’t heard from polish yet. On the event he doesn’t answer, I would think we’d wait until the Barr summary from what the group is saying. This thing is obviously close to its conclusion.

 

[waiguoren]

We haven’t heard from polish yet. On the event he doesn’t answer, I would think we’d wait until the Barr summary from what the group is saying. This thing is obviously close to its conclusion.

That's ridiculous. The DOJ has already stated there are no new indictments

 

[waiguoren]

We haven’t heard from polish yet.

We have heard from him. He was in here some hours ago under his alt account called Sous-la-pluie and was trying to trick me into changing his avatar into a beautiful painting.

 

[waiguoren]

I don't think tha-

...Carry on

You're wrong

 

[Jack V Savage]

False. Trump has only reached 44% six times in his presidency. The 'normal' fluctuation would be for Trump's approval to decline at this time. Instead, I am predicting it will *increase*.

If you go by RCP, it was at 44% earlier this month and is at 42.5% now. So you're predicting that next week, it'll reach the level it was at two weeks ago. Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but I don't see any basis for that call. It's a dumb bet offer.

That's possible. I don't recall the exact exchange. Actually, I will take that bet now if you want it. The problem is that you will be too lazy to write up a careful bet, just like last time.

What happened last time is that you were unwilling to make an exception for health problems, an assassination attempt, or a war. Obviously, we both know he'll never hit 50% without something like that.

This deserves no response. It's really dumb. Propaganda? Who is my audience? Did you think before you wrote this?

Your audience is the people reading you. You're welcome.

 

[Lead]

That's ridiculous. The DOJ has already stated there are no new indictments

The punishment is the same amount of time if we wait a couple days. Nothing to get too worked up about.

 

[Limbo Pete]

You're wrong

Oh?

 

[waiguoren]

What happened last time is that you were unwilling to make an exception for health problems, an assassination attempt, or a war. Obviously, we both know he'll never hit 50% without something like that.

So dishonest

 

[Jack V Savage]

So dishonest

Which part? Or are you just saying that in the WR right's typical "anyone who disagrees with me is dishonest" way?

 

[waiguoren]

The punishment is the same amount of time if we wait a couple days. Nothing to get too worked up about.

Jackie 'likes' this post because it buys him two more days of Champ status. Jackie, you had a good run but all good things come to an end.