2024 ELECTION THREAD

For the purpose of this thread I have no idea what’s going on but anything but 50/50 seems massively wrong

Have you considered the possibility that rather than some libtard cheerleadery thing , Kamala winning the election because of secret women voters is actually happening and great analysis?

I can't imagine how they'd be too different from true odds in a basketball game.

What are you talking about? I said like a week ago there were military troops scattered across the country securing the election and it was just made public. How about maybe proving someone's wrong before accusing them of lying (and wrong about something major, not a he said/she said/wikipedia said or based on things you've "read"). I have a much bigger and more extensive background in these things than you by a light year.

According to a Julia Roberts commercial I saw, the secret women voters better not let their white ballcap-wearing husbands know what they did, b/c oh boy they're cruisin' for a bruisin!

I explained above that I think the actual outcome is close to preordained at this point. We just don't know what it is. My point was that the actual chances that Trump or Kamala wins the election, whatever they might be, didn't shift 10 percentage points in 48 hours.

And rickroll's post wasn't really responsive to my point.

It’s certainly possible but I have to see it to believe it

Something came out about how kamala is ahead in iowa somehow because of the women vote and I’m sitting here thinking just no ****ing way. I’d love to believe it, but come on

Sorry. I'm not playing the burden flipping game. The person making the extraordinary claim has the burden of proof.

Also, it isn't as if you have a long history of being proven correct on these extraordinary claims. I honestly don't know whether you are purposefully lying or just delusional, but I do know that your predictions never have any connection to reality.

Haha yeah, they obv wanted to make sure the subtlety level was unsubtle enough so everyone in pennsylvania and north carolina understood.

Remember when I said I should be allowed to insult vague poster X rather than treat him like he deserves a seat at the table and legitimate retorts?

He is. He also is the same guy who said in 2020 that they were building a military prison within sight of either the WH or the Capitol (I forget which) to house all the deep state criminals.

it's rather the opposite - as i pointed out, a lot of people have large and long term positions and this close to the witching hour is when they begin to hedge out to guarantee a profit

i agree that nothing has dramatically shifted in last 48 hours but disagree with your belief that it's a market correction as you always see money pour in on the dogs close to the end of these things simply because people are hedging out their long term futures - it's far more profitable for me to go buy kamala now on poly than it is for me to sell my trump on predictit

but mostly this

I thought you were responding to my point that nothing had changed significantly in the last 48 hours.

Seems like every election there is a poll or 2 that everyone remembers because they are so far off. Harris leading in Iowa has the inside track to be this cycles Biden up 17 in WI

I mean if there’s validity to this iowa poll, and if kamala is seriously taking iowa of all places, the true odds are 100/0 kamala

i agree with that, i disagree that late money coming in on a dog is meaningful

that happens in every market where people are loaded up on futures - hence my uconn/purdue example where purdue steamed incredibly close to tipoff on no info whatsoever, just simply people with Uconn futures deciding to lock in a win

anyone with sizable positions on trump could (and still can) easily guarantee a profit now by buying kamala

Trump plummeting to -130 from -200. No idea if that’s late money or new polling

idk anything about polls and dont really put a ton of stock in them in the Trump era.. but this pollster has never been more than 5pts off.. so if it's R+2 in iowa that is still very bad for republicans. they were expecting an R+5 to be good for Harris

Are we referencing the same poll? I thought I read D+3

I don’t think she’ll win Iowa but Iowa voted for Dukakis,
Bill Clinton twice, Al Gore, and Obama twice.
It’s only seen as a non swing state due to very recent activity. Alabama, it is not.

I’m sure that poll is an outlier. Even so, a good sign.

yeah. and i was saying that she hasn't been off by more than 5 in her history from the tweets i read. so if this is her worst poll than it would be something like R+2 correct? that result is still bad for republicans.

I believe Selzer has the best polling track record in Iowa and is one of the leading pollsters in the country.

where? gladly take that bet.

Down to -125

Enjoy yourself