The Truthful State of the Election: Landslide confirmed...310 plus EV for Trump!

[Herbivore 1,193]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Is it a safe assumption to say that conservatives are probably more likely to be gamblers than libs?

And don’t betting lines move based on how the money is coming in?

So all this really means is more people are betting on Trump, which isn’t a surprise to me given the first point.

never followed any betting on elections info, but that was my first thought when this new thread title was posted...that I would guess Rs gamble at a higher rate than Ds, and this would be increased with Trump as the candidate. 

[jonmx 2,460]

As of Thursday at 7 a.m. ET, Trump held a 22-percentage-point edge over Harris on Polymarket. Betfair Exchange's market had a 20-point gap.

[jonmx 2,460]

As of Thursday at 7 a.m. ET, Trump held a 22-percentage-point edge over Harris on Polymarket. Betfair Exchange's market had a 20-point gap.

[Fnord 2,501]

17 hours ago, OldMaid said:

There is actually some debate surrounding this. 1 Dem and 1 Rep strategist seem to think the GOP is flooding the zone with crap polls. Apparently they did it in the 2022 midterms, as well.

I do remember reading about this or something similar. Essentially that was the reason that the R's were expecting a red wave that never materialized. Shlt GOP polling data.

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Is it a safe assumption to say that conservatives are probably more likely to be gamblers than libs?

And don’t betting lines move based on how the money is coming in?

So all this really means is more people are betting on Trump, which isn’t a surprise to me given the first point.

I do not know why that would be an assumption.  That said, I have no thoughts on tyhe matter one way or another, and certainly no data upon which to base an assumption.

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 hours ago, Herbivore said:

never followed any betting on elections info, but that was my first thought when this new thread title was posted...that I would guess Rs gamble at a higher rate than Ds, and this would be increased with Trump as the candidate. 

What is the thinking behind that assumption?

[Horseman 2,684]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

In what, popular vote?  What metric is the “Trump up 12 points in betting markets” referring to?

Read a book or something.

[avoiding injuries 1,650]

43 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

What is the thinking behind that assumption?

Lol. A gambler bets on who they think will win. Not who’s in their own political party. 

[League Champion 1,926]

 

 

[Alias Detective 1,459]

3 hours ago, Herbivore said:

never followed any betting on elections info, but that was my first thought when this new thread title was posted...that I would guess Rs gamble at a higher rate than Ds, and this would be increased with Trump as the candidate. 

OMFG

51 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I do remember reading about this or something similar. Essentially that was the reason that the R's were expecting a red wave that never materialized. Shlt GOP polling data.

OMFG

2 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

Lol. A gambler bets on who they think will win. Not who’s in their own political party. 

[zsasz 383]

7 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

Lol. A gambler bets on who they think will win. Not who’s in their own political party. 

Lot of people bet alot of money on their own sports team; regardless of whether they think they are going to win or....more importantly, they're looking at their own sports team thru rose colored glasses.  

[League Champion 1,926]

4 minutes ago, zsasz said:

Lot of people bet alot of money on their own sports team; regardless of whether they think they are going to win or....more importantly, they're looking at their own sports team thru rose colored glasses.  

Can you believe that a Man would vote for Kamala? Must be a cuck 

[OldMaid 2,135]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

I do remember reading about this or something similar. Essentially that was the reason that the R's were expecting a red wave that never materialized. Shlt GOP polling data.

https://www.nj.com/politics/2024/10/harris-vs-trump-analyst-tells-panicky-dems-gop-is-creating-fake-polls-desperate-unhinged-trumpian.html

Mathew Dowd seems to think the same thing, although I can’t find the article right now. 

[zsasz 383]

The crappy thing about this betting line is that when Harris wins.....it will fuel the conspiracy theorists even more . "HoW CoULD SHE Win!!!!?  MoRE PeOpeL BeTt on TruMPs!!!"  

[Horseman 2,684]

35 minutes ago, zsasz said:

Lot of people bet alot of money on their own sports team; regardless of whether they think they are going to win or....more importantly, they're looking at their own sports team thru rose colored glasses.  

And there are squares for all 32 teams.  It's the sharps that move the lines.  You're clearly not a sharp.

[zsasz 383]

16 minutes ago, Horseman said:

And there are squares for all 32 teams.  It's the sharps that move the lines.  You're clearly not a sharp.

We'll see.

 

Let's just not use it as a fuel for conspiracy theories when he loses.  

[League Champion 1,926]

1 minute ago, zsasz said:

We'll see.

 

Let's just not use it as a fuel for conspiracy theories when he loses.  

начале сотворил Бог небо и землю. 2Земля была безлика и пуста, тьма была над бездной, и Дух Божий парил над водами.

 

3Бог сказал: «Да будет свет

[Horseman 2,684]

15 minutes ago, zsasz said:

We'll see.

 

Let's just not use it as a fuel for conspiracy theories when he loses.  

There is nothing to see.  That's how it works.  You're talking about randos betting on their favorite teams, that happens to all the teams so it's a meaningless point.  Sharp money coming in on an edge is what moves lines.  Big money can move lines too, but, they're generally considered sharp because if they aren't they won't stay a whale for long.

None of that has anything to do with who wins in the end.  But, this line has moved a full dollar in the past 12 days.  That's crazy since there hasn't been any big news or October surprise.  That's on the level of Patrick Mahomes suddenly being ruled out with an injury line change.  It's not good news for team Harris. 

[Herbivore 1,193]

2 hours ago, Engorgeous George said:

What is the thinking behind that assumption?

just a guess as I said. who are the aggressive the gamblers here? we got more Rs in general, but still the ones that standout are Rs. I think the fact that sports gambling is more prevalent will have a big effect on how much is bet this go around. I think this will be more hope money. In general, I think Ds take less risks, Rs more.

[Horseman 2,684]

1 minute ago, Herbivore said:

just a guess as I said. who are the aggressive the gamblers here? we got more Rs in general, but still the ones that standout are Rs. I think the fact that sports gambling is more prevalent will have a big effect on how much is bet this go around. I think this will be more hope money. In general, I think Ds take less risks, Rs more.

Liberals take less risk than..............Conservatives?

I mean it's right there in the name! 

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

8 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

just a guess as I said. who are the aggressive the gamblers here? we got more Rs in general, but still the ones that standout are Rs. I think the fact that sports gambling is more prevalent will have a big effect on how much is bet this go around. I think this will be more hope money. In general, I think Ds take less risks, Rs more.

I appreciate the reply.  I was curious if there had been a study i might have read.  Personally i had never considered gambling propensity by politcal affliation nor had i noticed any trends one way or the other.  That may be becasue i never considered the matter.

[Strike 6,001]

33 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

just a guess as I said. who are the aggressive the gamblers here? we got more Rs in general, but still the ones that standout are Rs. I think the fact that sports gambling is more prevalent will have a big effect on how much is bet this go around. I think this will be more hope money. In general, I think Ds take less risks, Rs more.

Tim bet 6 people from this forum alone that Biden would be on the ballot.  Granted, he welched on several of those bets but he still made the bets to begin with. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,911]

1 hour ago, League Champion said:

Can you believe that a Man would vote for Kamala? Must be a cuck 

 No man would.  Cucks for Kamala. 

[League Champion 1,926]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Cucks for Kamala. 

 

[avoiding injuries 1,650]

57 minutes ago, Strike said:

Tim bet 6 people from this forum alone that Biden would be on the ballot.  Granted, he welched on several of those bets but he still made the bets to begin with. 

I thought Tim was a stand up guy when it came to betting? At least from what I remember over the years. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,535]

as someone who worked in the casino for 25 years, there are definitely more liberals than conservatives gambling on things

if we just break it down to racial biases 

[Strike 6,001]

29 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

I thought Tim was a stand up guy when it came to betting? At least from what I remember over the years. 

He wasn't this time.  Maybe due to the Covid recession his dad's business tanked a bit and he couldn't take the hit.  Or maybe he's just QLazzarus in disguise and he's willing to take the money if he wins but pusses out when he loses.  I don't know.  I'm not in his head.  Thank God.

[Mike Honcho 5,415]

25 minutes ago, Strike said:

He wasn't this time.  Maybe due to the Covid recession his dad's business tanked a bit and he couldn't take the hit.  Or maybe he's just QLazzarus in disguise and he's willing to take the money if he wins but pusses out when he loses.  I don't know.  I'm not in his head.  Thank God.

Did he stiff you? If it wasn't you, who did he stiff?  Why did you not pay someone @The Real timschochet?

[TimHauck 3,301]

4 hours ago, Engorgeous George said:

I do not know why that would be an assumption.  That said, I have no thoughts on tyhe matter one way or another, and certainly no data upon which to base an assumption.

Like @Herbivore, just a guess really.  But you can probably start with the fact that online gamblers skew male, and males skew Republican.

https://playtoday.co/blog/stats/male-vs-female-gambling-statistics/

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2020
 

2 hours ago, Horseman said:

There is nothing to see.  That's how it works.  You're talking about randos betting on their favorite teams, that happens to all the teams so it's a meaningless point. 

What a terrible take.  Do all teams have the same number of fans?

[Herbivore 1,193]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

Tim bet 6 people from this forum alone that Biden would be on the ballot.  Granted, he welched on several of those bets but he still made the bets to begin with. 

so 6 to 1. 

[jonmx 2,460]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

Tim bet 6 people from this forum alone that Biden would be on the ballot.  Granted, he welched on several of those bets but he still made the bets to begin with. 

I thought he paid everyone who claimed.  

[Mark Davis 424]

1 hour ago, avoiding injuries said:

I thought Tim was a stand up guy when it came to betting? At least from what I remember over the years. 

Tim paid me, did so immediately.  

[Strike 6,001]

4 minutes ago, jonmx said:

I thought he paid everyone who claimed.  

I don't believe so.  He didn't pay EG and, while EG ended up telling Tim to fock off and no need to pay him, EG DID make a claim at first which Tim  welched on.  The fact that EG ended up deciding it just wasn't worth it to collect doesn't change the fact that Tim denied the request to pay him and thus, in my mind, makes him a welcher.  Since then I've asked Tim on multiple occasions to post a list of everyone he bet and the resolution to those bets and he has declined.  I only know of one, maybe two people, who have said he paid them.  So I have no evidence that he paid everyone and I know for a fact there is one he didn't pay.  So, welcher.  QLazzTim.

[Gepetto 1,451]

27 minutes ago, Strike said:

I don't believe so.  He didn't pay EG and, while EG ended up telling Tim to fock off and no need to pay him, EG DID make a claim at first which Tim  welched on.  The fact that EG ended up deciding it just wasn't worth it to collect doesn't change the fact that Tim denied the request to pay him and thus, in my mind, makes him a welcher.  Since then I've asked Tim on multiple occasions to post a list of everyone he bet and the resolution to those bets and he has declined.  I only know of one, maybe two people, who have said he paid them.  So I have no evidence that he paid everyone and I know for a fact there is one he didn't pay.  So, welcher.  QLazzTim.

I'm pretty sure they both called that bet off prior to Biden dropping out of the race. Do you have proof of your serious accusation?

[Strike 6,001]

Just now, Gepetto said:

I'm pretty sure they both called that bet off prior to Biden dropping out of the race. Do you have proof of your serious accusation?

What?   You didn't follow that whole fiasco?  Tim tried to end the bet early and asked everyone to pay him.   EG said ok we can end the bet early but I won.  Tim balked at that and specifically called me out as one of the  arbiters of who won the bet.  He promised to go by whatever decision I made.  I posted my reasoning and I agreed with EG.  Therefore, Tim was on the hook to pay EG.  At that point EG said he didn't want Tim's money.   There are threads on this.  You can go look for them but please don't suggest I don't know what I'm talking about.  @The Real timschochet dragged me in to it.

[Gepetto 1,451]

23 minutes ago, Strike said:

What?   You didn't follow that whole fiasco?  Tim tried to end the bet early and asked everyone to pay him.   EG said ok we can end the bet early but I won.  Tim balked at that and specifically called me out as one of the  arbiters of who won the bet.  He promised to go by whatever decision I made.  I posted my reasoning and I agreed with EG.  Therefore, Tim was on the hook to pay EG.  At that point EG said he didn't want Tim's money.   There are threads on this.  You can go look for them but please don't suggest I don't know what I'm talking about.  @The Real timschochet dragged me in to it.

Yes, I remember, but I find it difficult to consider him a welcher for not paying when the bet was called off because of the whole fiasco. I feel like tim would have paid had no words from either side been said and the bet played out through to the official nomination of Kamala Harris; is all I meant.

[The Real timschochet 7,404]

@Strike is lying. 
 

There is not a single person that I owed money to that I didn’t pay immediately. 

In the case of @Engorgeous George there was a dispute. I didn’t think the result was fair so rather than pay at first I turned it over to others to judge, @Strike included. When @Strike ruled against me I immediately offered to pay but EG declined to accept payment. 
 

There is nobody here that I owe money to. I have NEVER welched on a wager. 

[The Real timschochet 7,404]

5 minutes ago, Gepetto said:

Yes, I remember, but I find it difficult to consider him a welcher for not paying when the bet was called off because of the whole fiasco. I feel like tim would have paid had no words from either side been said and the bet played out through to the official nomination of Kamala Harris; is all I meant.

If @Engorgeous George changed his mind I would pay him right now, immediately. I always honor my debts. 

[Mike Honcho 5,415]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

I don't believe so.  He didn't pay EG and, while EG ended up telling Tim to fock off and no need to pay him, EG DID make a claim at first which Tim  welched on.  The fact that EG ended up deciding it just wasn't worth it to collect doesn't change the fact that Tim denied the request to pay him and thus, in my mind, makes him a welcher.  Since then I've asked Tim on multiple occasions to post a list of everyone he bet and the resolution to those bets and he has declined.  I only know of one, maybe two people, who have said he paid them.  So I have no evidence that he paid everyone and I know for a fact there is one he didn't pay.  So, welcher.  QLazzTim.

Can't my questions...why's that?

[Strike 6,001]

4 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Can't my questions...why's that?

Can you write this again, in English?