The War Room Bet Thread

[Lead]

If and when the matter is investigated by whatever gov't body handles the investigation, my claim is that they'll find fewer than 3,000 unauthorized citizen votes in 2016. If no information comes in to confirm or refute that, the bet can't close.

Whenever, or if ever, we find out what the "official" investigation found. Whatever gets reported by the White House/Group appointed by White House at the end of the investigation, is what I'm going by. If no numbers are officially disclosed, then yeah, the bet is off. Now, if official numbers are found and confirmed by internet sleuths, I would be fine with going by that as well as long as the evidence was convincing.

The deadline is indefinite.

The investigation needs to find actual cases however, not estimates. Correct?

 

[Jack V Savage]

The investigation needs to find actual cases however, not estimates. Correct?

They need to find cases, but they don't have to list them. I'll be happy with any credible attempt at quantifying the number of unauthorized citizens who voted.

 

[Lead]

They need to find cases, but they don't have to list them. I'll be happy with any credible attempt at quantifying the number of unauthorized citizens who voted.

Yea, that's somewhat what I mean. I just don't want a report where they find instances and try to scale it to the population somehow. I don't think it would be done but this is a issue that's entrenched with politics behind it which usually gives both sides some ammo for whatever portion they take from the reports.

I'm just noting that estimates shouldn't be counted if you both could agree on that since those likely will range and be somewhat opinionated to a point I'm not comfortable enough with calling

 

[HereticBD]

The investigation needs to find actual cases however, not estimates. Correct?

Hard to say. I doubt the investigation will involve recounts of every single state, so estimations are probably going to be made to some degree.

Let's cross that bridge when we get to it. Let's just wait for some numbers first. It's only 3000 we're talking here, so I'm sure it won't be too hard to reason if the actual number is above or below that. I'd imagine if some announcement was made, there would substantial findings.

If for whatever reason they don't base their findings on any actual hard evidence, and just use some computer
algorithm or whatever, then I'd be cool with calling the bet off.

 

[Lead]

They need to find cases, but they don't have to list them. I'll be happy with any credible attempt at quantifying the number of unauthorized citizens who voted.

Hard to say. I doubt the investigation will involve recounts of every single state, so estimations are probably going to be made to some degree.

Let's cross that bridge when we get to it. Let's just wait for some numbers first. It's only 3000 we're talking here, so I'm sure it won't be too hard to reason if the actual number is above or below that. I'd imagine if some announcement was made, there would substantial findings.

If for whatever reason they don't base their findings on any actual hard evidence, and just use some computer
algorithm or whatever, then I'd be cool with calling the bet off.

I think we don't have a meeting of the minds quite yet on this part. Seems like you both have the opposite in mind there.

 

[Lead]

They need to find cases, but they don't have to list them. I'll be happy with any credible attempt at quantifying the number of unauthorized citizens who voted.

Hard to say. I doubt the investigation will involve recounts of every single state, so estimations are probably going to be made to some degree.

Let's cross that bridge when we get to it. Let's just wait for some numbers first. It's only 3000 we're talking here, so I'm sure it won't be too hard to reason if the actual number is above or below that. I'd imagine if some announcement was made, there would substantial findings.

If for whatever reason they don't base their findings on any actual hard evidence, and just use some computer
algorithm or whatever, then I'd be cool with calling the bet off.

This still isn't official yet. Try to come to a clearer conclusion on what the report should state meaning whether we are looking at estimates or individual cases.

 

[Lead]

@jimbob27
@tdluxon
@Ham Socks
@Taco Loco
@The Big Bang
@JohnnySagebrush
@luckyshot
@rj144

I get that it may have not been serious but are any of you guys interested in an av bet on whether Trump is impeached in his first term?

 

[HereticBD]

This still isn't official yet. Try to come to a clearer conclusion on what the report should state meaning whether we are looking at estimates or individual cases.

All I can say is that I'm cool with some kind of official statement, that is backed up with some kind of hard statistic.

If they come out and say "We found stuff that backs up our claims", without releasing any kind of hard evidence, then I won't claim victory. If it's the other way around, and they say "we didn't find anything to back up our claims" without any numbers, then I won't concede defeat.

Regardless, we're making this too complicated. It's 3000 votes. I highly doubt it will be too hard to find something one way or the other within a certainty, if the WH indeed makes some kind of formal announcement. Let's just wait for some numbers. I'm not going to be fussy, and demand that Donald Trump himself quotes the official numbers or anything. If the numbers can be backed up one way or the other, in a generally convincing way, I'm cool with that.

3000 votes over/under. That's it. It's a sig. We're not betting our lives, or anything.

 

[Lead]

All I can say is that I'm cool with some kind of official statement, that is backed up with some kind of hard statistic.

If they come out and say "We found stuff that backs up our claims", without releasing any kind of hard evidence, then I won't claim victory. If it's the other way around, and they say "we didn't find anything to back up our claims" without any numbers, then I won't concede defeat.

Regardless, we're making this too complicated. It's 3000 votes. I highly doubt it will be too hard to find something one way or the other within a certainty, if the WH indeed makes some kind of formal announcement. Let's just wait for some numbers. I'm not going to be fussy, and demand that Donald Trump himself quotes the official numbers or anything. If the numbers can be backed up one way or the other, in a generally convincing way, I'm cool with that.

3000 votes over/under. That's it. It's a sig. We're not betting our lives, or anything.

I just want to avoid anyone feeling cheated as a result of a bet in here.

1. The exact statement the bet is premised upon
2. Stance each poster is taking in regards to the statement
3. The date the bet will be decided
4. The reward/punishment for the winner/loser
5. The duration of the reward/punishment before I will post it.
6 (OPTIONAL) A situation which makes the bet void that isn't clear with the content in 1 & 2. This needs to be very clear if included.

Lets try this then

@HereticBD vs. @Jack V Savage
1. An official government report will show evidence of over 3,000 cases of voter fraud in the 2016 Presidential Election
2. HereticBD- for , Jack V Savage- against
3. If a report is released (see 6)
4. Signature bet
5. 1 month
6. If the investigation is not pursued or closed without giving a number to use, the bet is null. If a long amount of time passes with no further developments for it, the bet can be closed at the discretion of Lead or agreement between Jack & HereticBD

Sounds good?

 

[HereticBD]

I just want to avoid anyone feeling cheated as a result of a bet in here.

I know. I'm just making it clear that I won't be a dick about it, if overwhelming evidence is in my face. If Jack can say the same, let's get it on.

Lets try this then

@HereticBD vs. @Jack V Savage
1. An official government report will show evidence of over 3,000 cases of voter fraud in the 2016 Presidential Election
2. HereticBD- for , Jack V Savage- against
3. If a report is released (see 6)
4. Signature bet
5. 1 month
6. If the investigation is not pursued or closed without giving a number to use, the bet is null. If a long amount of time passes with no further developments for it, the bet can be closed at the discretion of Lead or agreement between Jack & HereticBD

Sounds good?

Sounds good.

 

[Lead]

I know. I'm just making it clear that I won't be a dick about it, if overwhelming evidence is in my face. If Jack can say the same, let's get it on.

Sounds good.

I appreciate it.
@Jack V Savage , make another one official?

 

[Lead]

@HUNTERMANIA

I get that it may have not been serious but are you interested in an av bet on whether Trump is impeached in his first term?

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

@HUNTERMANIA

I get that it may have not been serious but are you interested in an av bet on whether Trump is impeached in his first term?

Hmm.. I really like my avs... and I feel like for this kind of bet you're gonna want an extended period of time. How about sig. bet? For the record: I feel confident Trump SHOULD be impeached in his first term, but that doesn't translate into what WILL happen.

 

[Lead]

Hmm.. I really like my avs... and I feel like for this kind of bet you're gonna want an extended period of time. How about sig. bet? For the record: I feel confident Trump SHOULD be impeached in his first term, but that doesn't translate into what WILL happen.

I wouldn't mind doing dig. Probably would prefer it more tbh. So by should, do you not see it happening or do you think it could and thus would do a bet?

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

I wouldn't mind doing dig. Probably would prefer it more tbh. So by should, do you not see it happening or do you think it could and thus would do a bet?

I'm down. I'm already invested in this happening elsewhere, so I'm committed, I might as well make a bet here. I've put my cards on the table. And I honestly believe it should happen.

 

[Lead]

I'm down. I'm already invested in this happening elsewhere, so I'm committed, I might as well make a bet here. I've put my cards on the table. And I honestly believe it should happen.

I'll do anywhere from a one to six month sig bet, whatever you prefer. Also, if you'd like, we can have the bet null if these is a death or assassination of course. He had to go through his whole first term for me to win or be impeached in his first term for you to win. I'll format it to make it official and get your okay but let me know on the length

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

I'll do anywhere from a one to six month sig bet, whatever you prefer. Also, if you'd like, we can have the bet null if these is a death or assassination of course. He had to go through his whole first term for me to win or be impeached in his first term for you to win. I'll format it to make it official and get your okay but let me know on the length

We can go down the middle, 3 months. Agreed on terms.

 

[Lead]

We can go down the middle, 3 months. Agreed on terms.

1. The exact statement the bet is premised upon
2. Stance each poster is taking in regards to the statement
3. The date the bet will be decided
4. The reward/punishment for the winner/loser
5. The duration of the reward/punishment before I will post it.
6 (OPTIONAL) A situation which makes the bet void that isn't clear with the content in 1 & 2. This needs to be very clear if included.

@Lead v. @HUNTERMANIA
1. Trump will be impeached during his first term as President
2. HUNTERMANIA- for , Lead- against
3. End of Trump's term or if he is impeached beforehand
4. Signature bet
5. 3 months
6. If Trump is removed from office from illness, death, or assassination, the bet will be null

Just need a final okay on your side. I'll have you know I have yet to win a bet on here yet.

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

@Lead v. @HUNTERMANIA
1. Trump will be impeached during his first term as President
2. HUNTERMANIA- for , Lead- against
3. End of Trump's term or if he is impeached beforehand
4. Signature bet
5. 3 months
6. If Trump is removed from office from illness, death, or assassination, the bet will be null

Just need a final okay on your side. I'll have you know I have yet to win a bet on here yet.

Deal.

 

[waiguoren]

@rj144 @Lead

Bet:

rj144 wins if Donald Trump runs for the US presidency in 2020 and loses.

Waiguoren wins if Donald Trump runs for the US presidency in 2020 and wins.

The bet is a push if Donald Trump does not run for the US presidency in 2020.


1 year sig bet between rj144 and waiguoren.