Topic: 2024 U.S. Presidential Election Bets! - page 12. (Read 15349 times)

He is polling worse than he is going in the betting markets because the first scenario is about asking people how they intend to vote, while the betting market is how people believe the election is going to turn out in a few days. In short, people who put their money where they mouth is are more confident Trump is going to get elected than the average person who does not necessarily bets but is going to vote this next November.
Also, I would not give as much credit to polls, the past two elections (including the midterm election) showed to be a disappointed in the eyes of the Republican party, while in the polls it was predicted they were going to defeat the democrat party very badly.

So far, Trump's seems to be the favorite one. I am just curious to see whether Kamala will change her stand on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency or she will stick to the Biden agenda.

The reason why we have polls and odds be this current situation is because we are going to end up with a lot more trouble and because of this the difference makes sense for some people.

The reason why there is a gap between odds and polls is because Trump polls very very badly, meaning, whatever he gets on polls, he gets a lot more on elections, this has been true for both elections so far, and people are waiting for the same as well. Meaning, right now all the polls are showing battleground states to be just a thin margin Trump winning, and this means, people are saying if polls are showing Trump winning battleground states by a thin margin on polls, then it means he is leading by a big margin in reality, based on two previous elections.

Read my post again.  They aren't jumping the fence (in most cases).

Most of the comments in this thread discuss the chances of each of the main candidates in this election, but there is no mention of the campaign budgets of each candidate, which include assistance from prominent supporters.

Today I came across a newspaper article published on October 17, two days ago, that explains the difference in donations received by each candidate, taking into account that Kamala Harris entered the election race late after Joe Biden withdrew.

The article explains that according to Politico magazine, Elon Musk has pumped nearly $75 million into his political action committee to support the Republican candidate’s campaign in the US presidential elections, over a period of 3 months. Other conservative billionaires have also reportedly poured huge sums into Trump’s reelection effort, with Israeli-American billionaire Miriam Adelson’s $95 million donation to another leading pro-Trump super PAC, Preserve America, accounting for nearly all of the money it raised during the July-September quarter. Adelson and her late husband Sheldon were among the biggest donors to Republican candidates. Wyoming bank heir Timothy Mellon donated $125 million this cycle to Make America Great Again, a popular super PAC. Other Trump supporters who contributed big during the third quarter include the former Marvel billionaire and his wife Laura, who donated nearly $5 million late last month to the pro-Trump super PAC Right for America.

In contrast, Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party have outraised former President Donald Trump and the Republican Party in combined fundraising over the past three months, according to other sources. The Harris Victory Fund and the Harris Action Fund, the joint fundraising committees between the Harris campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and state Democratic Party committees, raised $652 million between July and September of this year.

The same article says that sources familiar with the matter told NBC that Harris has raised $1 billion in total since entering the race in late July after President Joe Biden dropped out, marking a significant fundraising milestone for her campaign against Republican rival Donald Trump.

I think these numbers are important to consider for both candidates, especially since there is a well-known influencer on the list of supporters who are able to influence voters in swing states.

Looking at the results we are going to see the situation not changing anytime soon, we are looking at an election that will be decided on the election day. Literally on election day where whoever ends up showing up will decide on the elections.

Both sides have enough votes to win this election, meaning that whoever ends up getting the most voters turn out for the current situation that means we are going to end up with winner based on just that. The margins are smaller than anything else I have seen so far. Every single close state is within 1% and that is the most important situation.

I believe we are going to see this not changing anytime soon and we are going to see this be the most important part. This is why I believe we are going to have some trouble, thing about the current 1% margins is it's within the margin of error for polls as well. Odds are showing close in all the centralized ones too, just decentralized ones are having a gap.

Will the Democrats expel her or will the Democrats be expelled by the people ? While the Democrats and the Biden administration are not crypto-friendly , this could change over time. In other words, they need to adapt to the crowd. If crypto gets a lot of support from the people and voters, but if they continue to maintain anti-crypto policies, which means they are going against the voters ,  they will not get any benefits . So I think they won't be able to maintain that view for much longer .

I am a Trump supporter and want him to win but to be fair we have no guarantee that he supports crypto or is just using it to increase votes .  Nothing can be said for sure until the election is over.


https://cryptoslate.com/harris-explicitly-announces-support-for-crypto-just-weeks-before-election/

If we are to judge the CHNV project today, I would consider it a total failure.
Read: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/venezuelans-legal-status-chnv-program/

The Biden administration had this Glee idea that flying people in from these countries to give them a visa legally would reduce illegal crossings. Well, not only did it play no role in reducing illegal immigration moreover these people are now trapped in a very paradoxical situation. They moved countries but the status won't be extended under the program they csme in. So unless in their short time here they obtained enough funds to fund legal proceedings for them to become legalized under a different process, they will have to face deportation.

Biden's supposedly more humane approach to curb immigration ended up cresting a humaniterian disaster. Now close to half million people will end up stranded, unable to work legally and forced to join black market labour, which the US already had a growing issue with.

The Biden administration was called upon many times to staff border authorities better and help make crossings and procedures more humane. Yet people are stacked in cages and facility camps waiting for asylum for months sometimes. It's crazy. If you're going to take people in at least have a fast track process for the humanitarian grounds. Maybe even allow them to apply in prior. Don't let things get worse to continue the kids in cages situations.

I don't think that Kamala Harris will suddenly change her attitude towards crypto, remember that she is affiliated democratic party, which has a hard line stance against crypto. If she made a U-turn then most likely she is going to be expelled by her party.

But Trump and his political party as what they say, they are pro-Bitcoin or pro-crypto themselves. That's why he take advantage of Bitcoiners in the US, but not sure if they are going to vote for him. Although so far, Trump is leading in the polls or at least favored in the betting sites.

If we see Kamala Harris change in attitude towards crypto, maybe this can be a positive signal for crypto in the future, especially if she is elected later and makes a friendlier policy towards crypto technological innovation applied, of course it will have a very positive impact on the development of crypto, but we must also remember that politics is often full of complex dynamics and policy changes can happen so far,  Although Kamala Harris is now starting to say that she will accept crypto, to be honest I will not believe her words 100%, because we know how politicians have been full of lies, so I think with the crypto industry that is increasing rapidly today, of course he is also starting to look for a face to raise his electability among crypto lovers.

My  focus was not on the CHNV program, which allowed around 400,000 people to immigrate legally. On the other hand, I was more concerned about the 12 million who are in the United States illegally. It is not fair to have people just jumping the fence, when law abiding visitors need to spend huge amount of money and wait for 18 to 24 months to get their visa processed. And AFAIK, almost half of these illegal immigrants are from Mexico. There was a drug war going on for a few years, but things are back to normal there. There is no justification to give any special status to Mexican illegals.

Nearing the election, the swing states have made a slight move towards Trump.

Goin by fivethirtyeight.com projections, the chances for either candidate to win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania are even and Trump is ahead in Georgia, Arizona and North Carolina. So if Trump wins either of the aforementioned evens tates, he's got it.

The election forecast now has Trump on 51% chances to win based on the simulations they run. Where previously until now he was behind Kamala!

No wonder Trump is afraid to answer questions to the media these days. One shitty thing to be said under pressure and he may lose the edge.
In any case though, things are not going to be easy for Trump because especially up north, it's going to be hard taking in more votes from these states that he needs to win.

The cause is OGNasty doesn't understand the difference between polls and betting markets.

And I guess you don't either even though I literally just explained the difference.  That's not a poll.  And if you try thinking about it without letting your hopes and dreams of a Trump victory influence your logic you'll realize how stupid the rigged polls conspiracy theory is.



They aren't being 'imported' and it's fucked up to dehumanize people like that. Especially people fleeing from places like Haiti and Venezuela.  I'd bet you'd feel a lot differently if you and your family and happened to be born in a country like that.

It's also fucked up to act like they're lying about fleeing Haiti and Venezuela for their own safety.  I supposed thinking of them like they're animals makes it a lot easier though.

And blaming immigrants for the dysfunctional US immigration system is as dumb as it sounds.  

In most cases, crossing the border illegally means walking into border patrol building at the border, being interviewed and processed, and then and then being allowed into the country.

If you're from somewhere like Haiti, like the people in Ohio that Trump has been lying about, you can get approved quickly and literally take a commercial flight in.  

The 400k from CHNV program? Maybe they work and pay taxes. But what about the 12 million imported by Kamala and Biden during the last 3.5 years? Just because they are human that doesn't give them the right to break laws and enter another country illegally. In any other sane society, such people will be put behind bars. The United States on the other hand spends money on them and encourage further illegal immigration in the form of birth right citizenship. Here in India, there is a 18-month wait to get an appointment for US B1 visa interview. Perhaps we should also cross the border illegally rather than paying the hefty visa fees and waiting for 1.5 years?

What do you speculate is the cause if this? Is this republicans around the world that are manipulating the odds on the sportsbooks and prediction markets or is this the personal and the political bias of the participants of the media polls and surveys?

Also, this is certainly not the first time this occurred where the media polls are showing that the other candidate is leading against Trump hehhehehe.

And they work.  And pay taxes.  And contribute to society.  And they're human beings. 

If a town has more jobs than people, why wouldn't they want more people to do those jobs? 

Those who are in cities such as Springfield (OH) are there legally (as per CHNV program). There are around 400,000 Haitians and Venezuelans flown into swing states such as Ohio by the Biden-Kamala administration, claiming that they need "protection". And at least in Ohio, RINOs such as the governor (Richard Michael DeWine) have supported this influx. Then there are around 12 million illegals at this point. They may not vote in elections. But they are counted during the census and increases the number of electoral votes in states where they live.

But with bigger population sizes, two deep blue states California and New York can bring many Electoral Votes to Kamala Harris if she wins these states. Those Electoral Votes from California and New York states are more than Electoral Votes for Trump if he wins Texas and Florida states.

In swing, battlefield states, by importing undocumented illegal immigrants and allowing them to legally votes in the President Election, Kamala Harris and Democratic Party are trying to win these swing states with very low margin. They don't need to win these swing states with Popular Votes, they need Electoral Votes, and win very low margin for winning, it's enough for Kamala.

I see this strategy is very ugly, first for their party to win the President Election and second in long term it harms the USA country and USA citizens generally.

During the last 2-3 decades, red states have turned pink, while blue states have become dark blue. This is the reason for the scenario where it is quite possible for Harris to win the election in terms of popular vote, and yet possible to lose the electoral college. States such as Virginia, New Hampshire and Colorado, which were considered as "neutral" earlier are now considered as blue. Previously dark red Texas is now close to becoming a swing state, and so is North Carolina and Georgia. Demographic changes are having an impact at the state level.

You're confused.

The polls showing Harris with a slight edge are national polls.  Including the margin of error, they represent the range that each candidate would finish the popular vote with if the election were held the day of the poll.  So, if the margin of error is 2.5, and the poll comes back with 49% for Harris and 46% for Trump, that means if the election were held today, Harris would finish with between 46.5% and 51.5% of the popular vote, and Trump would finish with between 43.5 and 48.5%.  

But the popular vote isn't what determines who wins.  It's the electoral college that matters, which is what election forecast models and betting markets are predicting.

According to Nate Silvers model, if Harris ends up with 1-2% more of the popular vote, she will still only have a ~22% chance at actually winning the election. If she gets 2-3% more of the popular vote, her chances are still just barely better than even money.  And it wouldn't be that crazy for her to win the pop vote by 3-4% and still end up losing the election.  That's mostly because California and New York have bigger combined populations that lean more democratic than Texas and Florida. 
 


Hope that clears things up for you.

I'm glad I got my Trump bets in early and often.  I got nearly double the odds on my early bets as the one I just placed.  Some of my parlays are pending with odds around 4:1 just waiting for that sweet announcement.  I still think it is hilarious how the gambling markets and the polls are saying two completely different things.  I think mainstream media is going to end this election season with another black eye with regular folks realize their "polls" are just pathetic manipulation attempts.