The War Room Bet Thread V4

[Jack V Savage]

His bet was basically this--

Biden won't debate- I win
Trump won't debate- He wins
Both of them debate- Draw

There's no doubt in my mind that the only two winning outcomes are A) the debates go through, draw, or B) Biden can't debate because of some excuse. This would apply for any of the debates, as in, if they debate the first time, and someone doesn't like how it goes, then all a sudden there can't be another debate because *insert.

I'm down to iron that out.

Yeah, I think B is absolutely ludicrous, a result of people taking ridiculous propaganda seriously. My offer is that Biden won't drop out of any debate (he desperately wants it). I think there's a decent chance that Trump will, but less than even. I'd prefer I win if Biden doesn't drop out. We can hammer out how to deal with it if Trump tries a weasel drop out (like attaching some unreasonable condition, which he's already discussed).

 

[MMAisGod]

Yeah, I think B is absolutely ludicrous, a result of people taking ridiculous propaganda seriously. My offer is that Biden won't drop out of any debate (he desperately wants it). I think there's a decent chance that Trump will, but less than even. I'd prefer I win if Biden doesn't drop out. We can hammer out how to deal with it if Trump tries a weasel drop out (like attaching some unreasonable condition).

Nah that's a suckers bet I'm not taking that lol.

I think the most likely outcome is that they debate and mudsling each other like typical debating goes (chances of no debates are slim imo, it would be really bad optics), but I think there's an off chance it doesn't happen. If that happens it will be because Covid too scary or Trump unworthy of legitimizing or some nonsense. Can't see Trump avoiding a chance to troll Biden on national TV at all. That dude lives for these moments.

So the safest bet imaginable is Draw/Win/Lose. Pretty much an auto win or auto draw, but no actual chance to lose. That I'll take, but definitely not a Biden-exclusive bet. I still think debates happening is the overwhelming favorite.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Nah that's a suckers bet I'm not taking that lol.

I think the most likely outcome is that they debate and mudsling each other like typical debating goes (chances of no debates are slim imo, it would be really bad optics), but I think there's an off chance it doesn't happen. If that happens it will be because Covid too scary or Trump unworthy of legitimizing or some nonsense. Can't see Trump avoiding a chance to troll Biden on national TV at all. That dude lives for these moments.

So the safest bet imaginable is Draw/Win/Lose. Pretty much an auto win or auto draw, but no actual chance to lose. That I'll take, but definitely not a Biden-exclusive bet. I still think debates happening is the overwhelming favorite.

Trump is already indicating that he's scared (saying Biden must have been on drugs or something to do so well against Bernie and calling for drug testing before they debate). He doesn't want to debate, but he's also worried that it'll look bad if he drops out. Biden sees it as a big opportunity, especially since it'll explode the campaign's dumb attack that he's not capable or something. All three debates happening is -230 on Bovada, and Metaculus average has around 90% for at least one happening. But OK, if you're not as much of a sucker for Republican propaganda as others here, I'll take your offer (which is most likely a draw). If Biden drops out, you win; if Trump drops out, I win; if there's a bullshit condition that causes it to fall apart, whomever insisted on it (rather than whomever refused it) is considered to have dropped out; and if they all happen, it's a draw. If there's a dispute about the insister, we either resolve it like gentlemen or it's a draw if we can't come to an agreement.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If anyone wants to bet that the debates won't happen because of Biden dropping out (LOL), I'm down for that, too.

Still can't believe that GOP propagandists are playing this so badly. Democrats cannot wait for the debates, but they (i.e., GOP propagandists) have idiot fans convinced that they (Democrats) don't want it, which will make Biden's performance look much better.

 

[MMAisGod]

Trump is already indicating that he's scared (saying Biden must have been on drugs or something to do so well against Bernie and calling for drug testing before they debate). He doesn't want to debate, but he's also worried that it'll look bad if he drops out. Biden sees it as a big opportunity, especially since it'll explode the campaign's dumb attack that he's not capable or something. All three debates happening is -230 on Bovada, and Metaculus average has around 90% for at least one happening. But OK, if you're not as much of a sucker for Republican propaganda as others here, I'll take your offer (which is most likely a draw). If Biden drops out, you win; if Trump drops out, I win; if there's a bullshit condition that causes it to fall apart, whomever insisted on it (rather than whomever refused it) is considered to have dropped out; and if they all happen, it's a draw. If there's a dispute about the insister, we either resolve it like gentlemen or it's a draw if we can't come to an agreement.

Alright that is a bit then, just a couple of deets to iron out real quick.

-6 month AV?
-Condition- Debates are in regular settings as expected currently, Ohio is the first debate that they will be present together.
-Conditions examples- Drop out has to be due to the person's comments, or their party's defense of the drop. For a hypothetical, a debate is scheduled for xyz date, but 2 weeks prior Biden and camp start saying it's too unsafe to debate in person in a Covid world. Now they want it to be a not-in-person virtual debate, which Trump disagrees and says it must be in person. Neither budges and debates don't happen. Biden is the loser here, since he tried to change the terms of the debate. Another example, all the same info, but Trump says Biden must take a drug test to debate. Biden refuses calling him crazy, and Trump says he took one already, and if Biden won't take one, the debate is off. Biden is the winner here, because Trump changed the terms of the debate. Another example, one debate happens, and Trump/Biden are pouting about how it went, now, they refuse to have another debate unless some change is made. The other person refuses to make the change, and one of them (doesn't matter which) drops out. The pouter is the loser regardless of who dropped out after. (I think you're already saying similar, but clarifying here, makes it easier to spell out if there's a fallout)
-Date of AV bet starts the month after on the 1st. So if someone drops in Sept, it starts Oct1. If someone drops in Oct, it starts Nov1.
-Obvious draw would be obvious result, all the debates happening.

^ What do you think of this? I sign off if you accept.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Alright that is a bit then, just a couple of deets to iron out real quick.

-6 month AV?
-Condition- Debates are in regular settings as expected currently, Ohio is the first debate that they will be present together.
-Conditions examples- Drop out has to be due to the person's comments, or their party's defense of the drop. For a hypothetical, a debate is scheduled for xyz date, but 2 weeks prior Biden and camp start saying it's too unsafe to debate in person in a Covid world. Now they want it to be a not-in-person virtual debate, which Trump disagrees and says it must be in person. Neither budges and debates don't happen. Biden is the loser here, since he tried to change the terms of the debate. Another example, all the same info, but Trump says Biden must take a drug test to debate. Biden refuses calling him crazy, and Trump says he took one already, and if Biden won't take one, the debate is off. Biden is the winner here, because Trump changed the terms of the debate. Another example, one debate happens, and Trump/Biden are pouting about how it went, now, they refuse to have another debate unless some change is made. The other person refuses to make the change, and one of them (doesn't matter which) drops out. The pouter is the loser regardless of who dropped out after. (I think you're already saying similar, but clarifying here, makes it easier to spell out if there's a fallout)
-Date of AV bet starts the month after on the 1st. So if someone drops in Sept, it starts Oct1. If someone drops in Oct, it starts Nov1.
-Obvious draw would be obvious result, all the debates happening.

^ What do you think of this? I sign off if you accept.

Let's make it a sig rather than AV. And say three months (I want to have flexibility for other bets).
Don't care where they're held. Don't think it should matter to the bet.
The COVID situation does complicate things a little since some level of precaution is obviously necessary. What if the offer is in-person but no crowd, and then someone insists on having a crowd, and things fall apart? That seems like a draw-type situation. The other examples, sure. I think we should just start with "no crowd" is a reasonable compromise to the hypothetical you describe, and that one is a draw if it's a deal-breaker.
OK. Normally, it would just be after settling, but that's fine if you want.
All debates happening is a draw, right.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I like this one, as it's a test of the kind of alternate-reality system that Republicans are living in. In their world, Democrats are worried about Biden debating and trying to stop him (see the vile Inga Vovchanchin advance that bit of propaganda). In reality, Democrats (talk to them, read them) cannot believe that Republicans are playing this so stupidly. Normally, both parties are trying to lower expectations as much as possible without actually insulting their own candidate because expectations are key to how the performances are interpreted. In this case, Republicans are doing all Democrats' work for them.

 

[Denter]

As someone totally uninterested in the outcome, and largely out of the loop on the propaganda, it appears to me that Biden sometimes misspeaks or gets confused. Sometimes, not all the time, and definitely not constantly. Trump seems to ramble and kind of stream of consciousness too- he's clearly not the same man he was in 2016, when he was sharper and funnier. It's ironic that we have two old timers running; in business I deal with a lot of guys who are older, and I've noticed that in 90% of cases, they aren't the same guy in their 70s as in their 60s. Father Time spares no man, and regardless of who wins, I'd expect to see either decline significantly during the 2021-25 term.

Jack's right about lowering expectations though.

 

[Jack V Savage]

As someone totally uninterested in the outcome, and largely out of the loop on the propaganda, it appears to me that Biden sometimes misspeaks or gets confused. Sometimes, not all the time, and definitely not constantly. Trump seems to ramble and kind of stream of consciousness too- he's clearly not the same man he was in 2016, when he was sharper and funnier. It's ironic that we have two old timers running; in business I deal with a lot of guys who are older, and I've noticed that in 90% of cases, they aren't the same guy in their 70s as in their 60s. Father Time spares no man, and regardless of who wins, I'd expect to see either decline significantly during the 2021-25 term.

Jack's right about lowering expectations though.

They're both super old and look and sound like it. Trump appears much further gone mentally. But more than that, Republicans are trying to push this idea that Democrats in general are worried about Biden, which could not possibly be further from the truth. People are in awe of the good fortune they're having to have this myth being pushed, and can't wait for the debates as a result.

 

[MMAisGod]

Let's make it a sig rather than AV. And say three months (I want to have flexibility for other bets).
Don't care where they're held. Don't think it should matter to the bet.
The COVID situation does complicate things a little since some level of precaution is obviously necessary. What if the offer is in-person but no crowd, and then someone insists on having a crowd, and things fall apart? That seems like a draw-type situation. The other examples, sure. I think we should just start with "no crowd" is a reasonable compromise to the hypothetical you describe, and that one is a draw if it's a deal-breaker.
OK. Normally, it would just be after settling, but that's fine if you want.
All debates happening is a draw, right.

Sig works too for sure, and 3 months. Sold. Yea I figured a timeline of when it starts on the "1st" is easier to track the time period.

About the crowd thing, that is decided by the commission themselves. So if they decide no crowd/500 members/5000 members, the two have to agree to those terms and debate. If it's no crowd, and Trump plays hardball causing a cancellation, he loses. If it's approved xyz amount of members, and Biden wants no crowd causing a cancellation, Trump wins. The commission has already denied Trump's request for a 4th location, denied an expanded crowd, designated only 1 moderator this year due to guidelines, and something else I can't remember so they seem to be very objective. It's fair to leave the rulings up to them, and then hold the candidates responsible for following what was outlined. This also holds true for potential future impact (I think which was your concern). If there is a huge spike in Ohio in Sept, and the commission decides it is too unsafe and the first debate must be virtual due to feedback from the docs, then it must be virtual regardless of opinion because both candidates are expected to follow the guidelines given for the debate platform.

If that changes from a candidate (Biden for this example) because it's getting close to the event, and it was all good in August, but a week or 2 before it's "too dangerous, must be virtual, we refuse to debate in person" even though nothing has changed and the commission has approved in-person, that is a loss for Biden if it is cancelled due to that reason. Or if Trump trolled him too hard/evaded questions too hard, and he wants a change in format or feels it isn't worth the time, it's a loss. Because he instigated the change that caused the cancellation when he already said he's looking forward to it.

If the debates happen in any way shape or format, it's a draw.

If Trump starts to say "we need a crowd of X amount of people" when the commission approves like virtual crowd only, and Biden says "we're going with what the commission decided", then a cancellation would be a loss for Trump. Or if Trump doesn't like the moderator/questions and complains about changes because he says they're picking on him, any cancellation is a loss for Trump. Trump would be the instigator of the cancellation, so his reasoning would be the cause of the loss.

That's pretty much what I meant, since everything is pretty much in stone right now on Biden's side (seems like he's willing to follow what guidelines are given and debate), while Trump is currently threatening drug tests and petitioning to the committee (unsuccessfully) for large crowds.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Sig works too for sure, and 3 months. Sold. Yea I figured a timeline of when it starts on the "1st" is easier to track the time period.

About the crowd thing, that is decided by the commission themselves. So if they decide no crowd/500 members/5000 members, the two have to agree to those terms and debate. If it's no crowd, and Trump plays hardball causing a cancellation, he loses. If it's approved xyz amount of members, and Biden wants no crowd causing a cancellation, Trump wins. The commission has already denied Trump's request for a 4th location, denied an expanded crowd, designated only 1 moderator this year due to guidelines, and something else I can't remember so they seem to be very objective. It's fair to leave the rulings up to them, and then hold the candidates responsible for following what was outlined. This also holds true for potential future impact (I think which was your concern). If there is a huge spike in Ohio in Sept, and the commission decides it is too unsafe and the first debate must be virtual due to feedback from the docs, then it must be virtual regardless of opinion because both candidates are expected to follow the guidelines given for the debate platform.

If that changes from a candidate (Biden for this example) because it's getting close to the event, and it was all good in August, but a week or 2 before it's "too dangerous, must be virtual, we refuse to debate in person" even though nothing has changed and the commission has approved in-person, that is a loss for Biden if it is cancelled due to that reason. Or if Trump trolled him too hard/evaded questions too hard, and he wants a change in format or feels it isn't worth the time, it's a loss. Because he instigated the change that caused the cancellation when he already said he's looking forward to it.

OK. Makes sense. Didn't really think about the process myself. Sounds good here.

I think my chances of losing this one are pretty close to 0. Chances of winning are maybe 25%. So most likely kind of a dud. But still fun.

 

[MMAisGod]

OK. Makes sense. Didn't really think about the process myself. Sounds good here.

I think my chances of losing this one are pretty close to 0. Chances of winning are maybe 25%. So most likely kind of a dud. But still fun.

Awesome! Alright it's official, you've got a bet. My first official bet (FF doesn't count).

Knowing my luck Trump will give a speech tomorrow about how he refuses to debate without *insert unapproved amounts of people* lol.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Awesome! Alright it's official, you've got a bet. My first official bet (FF doesn't count).

Knowing my luck Trump will give a speech tomorrow about how he refuses to debate without *insert unapproved amounts of people* lol.

To me this is like betting my wife that if Christmas is canceled this year, it won't be because my daughter insisted on it. Any interest in another one on post-debate polling (either who gets a bump or who is generally seen as the winner)?

 

[MMAisGod]

To me this is like betting my wife that if Christmas is canceled this year, it won't be because my daughter insisted on it. Any interest in another one on post-debate polling (either who gets a bump or who is generally seen as the winner)?

LOL! That's actually an excellent analogy haha. I don't know if we'd be able to iron out a post-debate polling bet though. We'd likely be very similar in theory there on either potential winner, political positions aside, in regards to what the expected public opinion will be.

Ran out of likes R.I.P.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Anyone think that Trump will get a boost from the first debate or that he'll be widely seen as the winner?

 

[Jack V Savage]

@HereticBD?

 

[MMAisGod]

Anyone think that Trump will get a boost from the first debate or that he'll be widely seen as the winner?

@HereticBD?

Don't do it bro! I don't want to see you lose your Game of Thrones AV lol. King Joffrey can't go down like that.

 

[HereticBD]

Don't do it bro! I don't want to see you lose your Game of Thrones AV lol. King Joffrey can't go down like that.

I don't think the debates are all that measurable, where you could actually define a winner. Nor could you really break down what caused a boost or not. It would not be an easy bet to settle, and I already tangled with Jackie for three pages over the simplest bet imaginable. It was enough of a task to hash out one very simple bet with him, so I think I'm good for betting Jackie for a while.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't think the debates are all that measurable, where you could actually define a winner. Nor could you really break down what caused a boost or not. It would not be an easy bet to settle, and I already tangled with Jackie for three pages over the simplest bet imaginable. It was enough of a task to hash out one very simple bet with him, so I think I'm good for betting Jackie for a while.

It's very simple. Either look directly at polls about who won or look at how the polling average changed between the polls taken immediately before and after the debate.

IMO, you're pretending to oppose the bet because it's too complicated or something because you know that Trump is going to get spanked and don't want to either admit it or bet against it.

 

[MMAisGod]

I don't think the debates are all that measurable, where you could actually define a winner. Nor could you really break down what caused a boost or not. It would not be an easy bet to settle, and I already tangled with Jackie for three pages over the simplest bet imaginable. It was enough of a task to hash out one very simple bet with him, so I think I'm good for betting Jackie for a while.

Haha I didn't see all that. But you can hit him with something like before-and-after polling, so it would be if someone went up/down post-debate by any amount at all, one wins and one loses. Simplify it that way. I don't have the balls for that bet though.