Topic: 2024 U.S. Presidential Election Bets! - page 19. (Read 15310 times)

Agreed and you are very much correct. The ratings on this prediction market should only be considered as a number on who might be leading to have the victory on November. How much in wagers have been created on Polymarket? There might be more than $500 million and if there are millions of stupid money in a market, there will certainly be smart money who will follow heheheh. If much of the stupid money will bet on Trump then this will move Trump's ratings higher and cause a bet on Kamala to be cheaper. This is where the smart money will have their opportunity and bet more on Kamala.

We can be certain that the smart money, these bettors who have more information than much of the other people who are participating in this market, will bet more money on Kamala if the information tells them that she has the advantage to win on November. This will cause the ratings to go back to 52% for Kamala and only 48% on Trump.



Also, there are republican supporters outside of America? I did not know this heheheheheheheheee.

They are like you when you rely on the debate results and declare that Harris is better than Trump and deserves to be president. Or you also rely on polls that show results in Harris' favor and claim that Harris is more popular with voters   .

I agree that polymarket poll results do not represent the final outcome of the election and things could be completely opposite. But do you know why most people prefer to use polymarket than any other site? Even institutions and companies rely on Polymarket polls to make election predictions, not just crypto investors like you say. Polymarket is a decentralized prediction market platform, at least it will give us fairer results than all the other polls manipulated by the 2 parties.

Harris's approval rating sometimes surpasses Trump's and polymarket still shows it, but for some reason her approval rating has dropped sharply in the last 2 days.

CNN making an attempt to call out obvious bs, quite rarely do I see this stated.   Politics does contain alot of nonsense in many speeches, they are often aiming for a narrative of some sort regardless of restraints of reality.


Statistics themselves are often inaccurate in any case, some people just do not register for various reasons.   There is apparently 900k of undocumented migrants for example.  The other obvious note would be for those with multiple jobs, out of nessecity many people work more then one job to pay the bills.  A recession that loses you 2 out of your normal 3 income streams is clearly going to knock the average family sideways in terms of ability to pay their bills.

It's not my intention to attack you, just your 'ideas'/'alternative facts'.  Let me try to to be more clear.



Biden didn't say that.  

Here's what he said, from the article you linked:

It's bullshit to say he said that.  Because he didn't.

Cutting off aid until a cease fire was agreed would encourage Hamas to delay a ceasefire for as long as possible, and if one did eventually happen, they would have much more leverage in negotiations.  Israel is an ally, Hamas is an enemy. I'm not saying you're wrong on this one.  There's plenty of valid criticism to be made about how Biden has handled Israel - my only point is that it's not as simple as you are trying to make it seem.

The whole world doesn't call Biden a genocidal lunatic. Biden didn't blame Netanyahu for not helping Kamalas re-election campaign.  

They do.  A Trump victory would make it easier for Putin and Netanyahu to continue with their respective invasions.

No.  Netanyahu is literally Trumps friend though.  And Trump has made it clear he'd like to be friends with Putin.

'Trump needs to make friends with Putin and Netanyahu to get elected' is not the same as 'Putin and Netanyahu would both prefer a Trump victory' or, 'Netanyahu and Putin are both trying to help Trump win'.  

Ok, if it wasn't right wing media, then why did you post:

It was right wing misinformation that you fell for, or you pulled it out of your ass.  Is there another possibility I'm missing?



Have I succeeded? 

In my opinion, Kamala Harris currently has a higher probability of becoming the new US President than Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is already known to Americans. He has certain personal merits, but there are also significant shortcomings. These shortcomings are known to everyone. Even ardent supporters of Donald Trump admit their presence.

At the same time, Kamala Harris has not yet proven herself. Voters are uncertain - it is currently unknown what kind of President Kamala Harris will become. This is intrigue. American citizens do not have experience of a woman - the President of the United States.

People love novelty, they are interested in trying something new in life.
Therefore, the probability that Kamala Harris will be elected President of the United States is very high.

It's hilarious watching some people in this forum fully depend on polymarket to assess the presidency election. It's just a tool for reference and anyone with a half-decent brain wouldn't completely depend on it.

FYI, it's actually banned in the USA and is filled with crypto dudes who are mostly republican supporters. The actual result looks like it's evenly split(50:50) between both at the moment based on multiple reference points.

In my opinion, you are right but he over-promised over what he was capable of. He did not only promised he would build a wall to stop illegal immigration and make Mexico pay for it, he also promised to get rid of the spending deficit of the country and other things which he could not get done, he even tried to ban foreigners from Muslin majority countries from entering the United States, until a judge ruled it was unconstitutional to do such a thing.
He was definitely different from the average Washington politician, but he could change anything because of how the establishment works, in general democracy in the USA is built so the president alone cannot change how things work and make society better.

As it stands for now, it seems both Trump and Kamala have gotten similar odds on the betting markets, which is a good sign for Trump, since he was already losing some steam. I am still waiting for some bombshell report before placing my final bet on either of them, the so called October surprise.

It's a tie again:



I was little surprised about the fact that trump led for a while, considering the fact that all of his promises are so transparent lies. Just listing his crimes and crimes he is credibly accused of, would make me seem like i am trying start a flame war, as they are so horrid. And imagine him dying of old age after becoming president. Who would want his running mate anywhere near to real power? Because i haven't seen even most loyal magahats praising him. His popularity seems to be in the dumpster:

https://newrepublic.com/post/184438/jd-vance-popularity-brutally-embarrassing-hit

Trump was "the" change people wanted, he wasn't a career politician, he was never part of politics before, and before he became a nominee he had never spent a day in public office before. So this made him win, because people saw career politicians end up getting the votes and be nominee and just went with him to see what would happen if you picked someone who would be different.

However, that did not turned out too well for many people, while democrats "mocked" him before the election, and when they lost they were afraid, if he did very well then they would have softened, but we all saw his four years, and we all saw what he did with covid and supreme court, so lets be honest and realize maybe he may have lost 2020 not because of party or population or anything else but because he was a straight up bad president?

There shouldn't be any questions if he loses this one too, which will be very obvious that he will not be the candidate ever again, even if he wants to be candidate for 2028, if he loses this one then people will not vote for him in 2028 and republicans will honestly pick someone else, he is just too old, and losing two times will make his potential very low.

Yeah, I think it's going to be very tight. Maybe closer to 50/50.

It's going to be a massive thing when it happens, no matter who wins, it will be a massive event.

Hopefully nothing violent happens though, but maybe it will...

@TwitchySeal no need to spend so much time attacking me and my reading skills, really. The Telegraph is right leaning yet the second article I posted was attacking pro trump narratives. So your assumptions that I am forming my opinions from right wing media are nonsense.

Anyway, I think you have failed to address my most important points other than attacking me.
If Biden wants a ceasefire in Palestine, stop sending arms and aid and it'll come very fast.

As of Trump & Russia. Surely not continuing support for the war in Ukraine is something that would suit Putin. But then again, have you looked at the polls for how many Americans support funding the war in Ukraine? Hell, lately even in Ukraine support for the war has been falling. Biden and Kamala are from a faction of the democratic party that would be very glad to start wars abroad sometimes for no reason at all. Hillary Clinton had the world renowned butcher, Kissinger, as her advisor. Many peoples around the world suffered for triangular diplomacy, i.e. advancing US interest through military power and forced diplomacy. Trump may be a dunce but one less war is a good thing.

On your entertainment factor argument, I very much agree hhehhe. It also appears that there will be swing voters who will also agree and vote Trump. Kamala should convince the voters that she is very much smarter than how she appears because if she is considered as stupid as the Donald, I reckon the decision on who to vote would be very much easy.

In any case, Trump's ratings might begin to pump. Will this be more than 55% on November 1?

Here's what I was responding to:




I don't think you actually read either of the links you posted.  You should.  Relying on right wing media to determine your view of left wing media will almost always land you in the land of make believe.  


As I've already said, there is no doubt Netanyahu would prefer a Trump victory in November.  Same with Putin.  When Republicans or MAGA fans say otherwise, they are trolling.  Every single rational and informed person would agree that Putin and Netanyahu both hope for a Trump victory.  It's not even close.  Claiming otherwise would be almost as ridiculous as saying Zelensky was hoping for a Trump victory.  Read what I've already posted, and especially Chuck Schumers speech and Bidens comments on it if you still aren't convinced.


I hope you rethink your view of the 'democrats and the media cronies'.  Because at least in this case, what you think is real is actually not.

Netanyahu is holding back any ceasefire to help himself primarily. Nobody has mentioned he was not in power fully before this war, remember the troubles with his Supreme court etc.  He has a unity government only because of this attack really and that is a big motivator to his actions ongoing.


I think they would very much not like to call sides but its obvious a few governments would prefer Trump for his very different policy to the ongoing norms.   Putin saying he doesnt want Trump is a joke, of course he wants NATO to be trimmed so Trump is a dream candidate in that respect.

The biggest news is the oil price rise, this helps Trump.  Its such a large factor that if oil keeps rising upto election day then Trump has his best chance imo, if swing states contain people deciding on the day in any way then it could simply be enough to push him over the line. 

@stompix

Don't get me wrong, I believe Trump is the most incendiary presidential candidate on the Israel-Palestine issue the U.S. has seen.
But my first post was about Biden claiming the Netanyahu government is holding back a ceasefire to help Trump. Which I find ironic.
So we agree that Trump could be a menace for Palestinians. But then again, isn't it ironic that Biden suggests there might even be a ceasefire with Trump? Surely he cares about the election outcome to bring that up publicly, but he doesn't care about the voters he has lost the Democratic party with his own actions?



Ok, so Biden knows they've completely lost some people. So he doesn't care to suggest that Netanyahu may be delaying a ceasefire to harm Democrats, albeit not doing anything to pressure Israel into a ceasefire. Pretty careless of him. Most probably you're right that they THINK this won't affect their numbers much especially in relation to Jewish pro-zion votes vs pro-palestine votes. But pro-palestine people aren't just Muslim/Palestinians in the USA. The marches for Palestine across the country have been attended by people through all walks of life. So I think Democrats are underestimating the votes they're losing because of their Palestine policy so far and it might really cost them the election.

How about a reality check, first Trump's own words on Iran yesterday:

Is this so hard to understand?
No Muslim or Palestinian that can vote would vote for Trump ever, but Israeli supporters would!
Simple as that, the democrats know they won't lose those voters but could lose the others!


This is still chill, you should see what's happening on TikTok, Republicans can't figure out what she is, black, indian, african, native, lesbian, gay, transexual, good thing that elections are soon, otherwise god knows what theories might surface!

If at all anything would happen regarding Harris's skin colour, it's gonna be in her favour. You'll see enough people of colour in the US and that alone is enough reason for her to garner more votes because which is one of them. But talking about the tone as he puts it, it's certainly baseless, who cares about what you do with your skin?

Hahaha...at this point, I guess you should beware of what you reply to, some people may drive you crazy with their unfounded remarks.

I'll pull a JD Vance on you and say...
Let's for the sake of argument agree that Bibi is in fact attempting to do sway the U.S. public opinion towards Trump with his tactics. Why then is Biden continuously reaffirming his support for Israel? Why does he keep sending aid and weapons? Did he only just now realize that it might cost Kamala the election?

The option to appeal to their own supposedly left wing humanitarian standards was always there. But all they did was "express concern" while continuously blocking UN resolutions for a ceasefire and supplying all the means for Israel to continue the genocide. Truly Israel is a terrible partner to have. And the Democrats are also quite traitorous towards their own country themselves, to even go as far as to admit publicly that Israel is trying to influence the election against them, but still do nothing to stop them.

Do you really still think Netanyahu isn't rooting for Trump?  Is this a right wing talking point that you read somewhere?  Wherever you got the idea from, that's the media you should be angry at.

Lot's of democrats support Israel.  Very few Democrats support Netanyahu.  Biden obviously cares a lot about protecting Israel, and he also obviously thinks Netanyahu is killing way too many innocent people.  Look up what Biden said about the speech Chuck Schumer gave calling on Netanyahu to resign.

Weren't Golan Heights already occupied by Israel?
Recognition by the U.S. doesn't change the fact that it   is a mountain region and doesn't make it more secure for settlement or anything. Already prior to Trump there were 20000 settlers there. So it's not much if anything new. Trump recognizing Jerusalem and Golan heights for Israel makes him more of an opportunist if anything, because while these may have a big sentimental value for isrselis, not much changes in real life with recognition.

And the Democrats know all that. They kept the embassy and Golan heights recognition.
Biden and Kamala are very Zionist as an administration.

Most importantly, Biden and Kamala have been giving Israel record numbers of ammunition and aid while it's commiting genocide. So by these events alone they're worse.

If you compare how much money democrats vs republicans are receiving from AIPAC, the Zionist lobby, you'll see that both parties are very influenced by Jewish money. There's not much distinction these days. Zionists have decided to influence both sides on the spectrum and their investment has worked. They've been wipping out all opposition to their cause in all levels of government. From local house reps to even presidential candidates. Now it's the presidential election and people in the US effectively can't even vote for a candidate offering alternative solutions to the matter that also has a realistic path to the presidency.