JOE SCARBOROUGH: Why do you think Donald Trump won't debate [Kamala Harris] again?
DOUG EMHOFF: You saw the first debate, didn't you?
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.
EMHOFF: Yeah. That's why. He got his ass kicked.
Then Donald Trump backed out of "60 Minutes" and demanded that CBS be stripped of its broadcasting license. Good gravy, how bad is his internal cognitive decline?
Kamala's not doing interviews! She can't hack it! Kamala's doing softball interviews! She can't hack it! Kamala's doing conservative media interviews! She can't hack it!
Sep 3-- Harris by 3.0 Sep 10-- Harris by 2.5 (debate night) Sep 17-- Harris by 2.9 Sep 24-- Harris by 2.6 Oct 2-- Harris by 2.8 Oct 9-- Harris by 2.5 Oct 16-- Harris by 2.6
Brian Stelter: "Trump refused to debate Harris again, so she did the next best thing and did battle on Fox. News junkies will dissect specific answers, but normies will just hear that she went into enemy territory and survived, and thrived."
Kamala's fading in my simple chart! She can't hack it!
Elon Musk tweeted multiple times about Polymarket. Right-wingers flooded Polymarket to put money on Trump.
Almost as shrewd an investment as getting in early on Trump Social stock, or those limited edition digital Trump trading cards.
Like any betting site when money rushes in, the odds shifted. And then conservatives flooded websites with giddy reports about the nonexistent sudden shift against Harris that they paid to create.
You guys are fondling yourselves, but at least you're happy. You would have done better to spend the cash on OnlyFans.
Forbes: Trump’s Election Odds Spike On Polymarket As Musk Touts Betting Site
What caused the swing in Trump’s favor on Polymarket. Some social media users noted the movement came as one anonymous user by the name “Fredi9999” upped his bets on a Trump win to over $4 million. Polymarket does not limit individual bettors like PredictIt ($850 limit) or Kalshi (previously $25,000 but Kalshi shared a bet of more than $60,000 on Trump Monday) as it operates as an “offshore” book and does not face the same federal regulations. So, it’s possible that Trump’s odds shifted on Polymarket as it was the result of buying activity from one or a handful of big-ticket bettors rather than a material shift in the election landscape.
Elon Musk, who endorsed Trump in July and appeared at a rally with the Republican candidate Saturday, shared several posts on his X social media platform touting the Polymarket shift. Musk shared a post connecting the jump to his appearance at Trump’s Pennsylvania rally, wrote betting odds are “more accurate than polls as actual money is on the line” and reposted a screenshot emphasizing the “collapse” of Harris’ election odds.
In a Monday evening post on his Silver Bulletin blog, statistician Nate Silver noted the shift in Trump’s favor on Polymarket is a “larger swing than is justified”—pointing out that his election model shows Harris with a 54.7% chance of winning. Silver, who also serves as an advisor to Polymarket, added there “isn’t much” driving the tilt, but named several theories, such as trigger-happy traders, Musk’s hype and that Polymarket’s trader base may more heavily consist of Trump supporters.
Thanks, Forbes, for telling us you don't understand how markets work.
Apparently, Forbes is admitting they don't understand. Some social media users noted...it’s possible...the result of buying activity...rather than a material shift in the election landscape...Nate Silver added there “isn’t much” driving the tilt...several theories. And Musk's comments came after the swing was well underway.
What Forbes didn't attempt to explain was why defenders of democracy aren't willing to put their money where the simple charts say it belongs - on a now bargain price for Kamrade's odds on Polymarket. Think of how they could clean up by buying her current 39% odds. And said activity would of course move the odds back closer to 50%.
Oops, just checked on one of your simple charts. 538 now shows the odds in Trump's favor, 53/47. Compared to what they showed before, would you call that momentum? Or do you suppose this is due to Fredi9999 scraping together another $30 million to throw away on a bribe to 538?
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Why do you think Donald Trump won't debate [Kamala Harris] again?
ReplyDeleteDOUG EMHOFF: You saw the first debate, didn't you?
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.
EMHOFF: Yeah. That's why. He got his ass kicked.
Then Donald Trump backed out of "60 Minutes" and demanded that CBS be stripped of its broadcasting license. Good gravy, how bad is his internal cognitive decline?
Looks like Kamala's going to go on Joe Rogan's podcast, too. Golly gumdrops, it almost seems like a strategy.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how the polls are making her do things previously unthinkable. So I guess it's a kind of "strategy".
DeleteCouldn't Kamrade find a better surrogate than Doug to make a metaphor involving person-on-person violence?
ReplyDeleteKamala's not doing interviews! She can't hack it!
ReplyDeleteKamala's doing softball interviews! She can't hack it!
Kamala's doing conservative media interviews! She can't hack it!
Kamala's fading in my simple chart! She can't hack it!
DeleteThere's no lower shame for Trump than when Doug Emhoff accurately bitch-slaps him.
ReplyDeleteMan or girlfriend alike, there would be no lower shame. But of course in this case the disqualifier word is "accurately".
ReplyDeleteThat's the kind of categorical switcheroo someone makes when Trump still hasn't yet led Harris in the polls for even a day.
ReplyDeleteWhat is your sense of which way the momentum is going in this race?
DeleteWhat momentum?
DeleteSep 3-- Harris by 3.0
Sep 10-- Harris by 2.5 (debate night)
Sep 17-- Harris by 2.9
Sep 24-- Harris by 2.6
Oct 2-- Harris by 2.8
Oct 9-- Harris by 2.5
Oct 16-- Harris by 2.6
Brian Stelter:
"Trump refused to debate Harris again, so she did the next best thing and did battle on Fox. News junkies will dissect specific answers, but normies will just hear that she went into enemy territory and survived, and thrived."
Kamala's fading in my simple chart! She can't hack it!
ReplyDeleteElon Musk tweeted multiple times about Polymarket. Right-wingers flooded Polymarket to put money on Trump.
Almost as shrewd an investment as getting in early on Trump Social stock, or those limited edition digital Trump trading cards.
Like any betting site when money rushes in, the odds shifted. And then conservatives flooded websites with giddy reports about the nonexistent sudden shift against Harris that they paid to create.
You guys are fondling yourselves, but at least you're happy. You would have done better to spend the cash on OnlyFans.
Thanks for telling us that you don't understand how markets work, while pretending you do.
DeleteIt was my pleasure.
DeleteForbes: Trump’s Election Odds Spike On Polymarket As Musk Touts Betting Site
What caused the swing in Trump’s favor on Polymarket.
Some social media users noted the movement came as one anonymous user by the name “Fredi9999” upped his bets on a Trump win to over $4 million. Polymarket does not limit individual bettors like PredictIt ($850 limit) or Kalshi (previously $25,000 but Kalshi shared a bet of more than $60,000 on Trump Monday) as it operates as an “offshore” book and does not face the same federal regulations. So, it’s possible that Trump’s odds shifted on Polymarket as it was the result of buying activity from one or a handful of big-ticket bettors rather than a material shift in the election landscape.
Elon Musk, who endorsed Trump in July and appeared at a rally with the Republican candidate Saturday, shared several posts on his X social media platform touting the Polymarket shift. Musk shared a post connecting the jump to his appearance at Trump’s Pennsylvania rally, wrote betting odds are “more accurate than polls as actual money is on the line” and reposted a screenshot emphasizing the “collapse” of Harris’ election odds.
In a Monday evening post on his Silver Bulletin blog, statistician Nate Silver noted the shift in Trump’s favor on Polymarket is a “larger swing than is justified”—pointing out that his election model shows Harris with a 54.7% chance of winning. Silver, who also serves as an advisor to Polymarket, added there “isn’t much” driving the tilt, but named several theories, such as trigger-happy traders, Musk’s hype and that Polymarket’s trader base may more heavily consist of Trump supporters.
Thanks, Forbes, for telling us you don't understand how markets work.
Apparently, Forbes is admitting they don't understand. Some social media users noted...it’s possible...the result of buying activity...rather than a material shift in the election landscape...Nate Silver added there “isn’t much” driving the tilt...several theories. And Musk's comments came after the swing was well underway.
DeleteWhat Forbes didn't attempt to explain was why defenders of democracy aren't willing to put their money where the simple charts say it belongs - on a now bargain price for Kamrade's odds on Polymarket. Think of how they could clean up by buying her current 39% odds. And said activity would of course move the odds back closer to 50%.
Oops, just checked on one of your simple charts. 538 now shows the odds in Trump's favor, 53/47. Compared to what they showed before, would you call that momentum? Or do you suppose this is due to Fredi9999 scraping together another $30 million to throw away on a bribe to 538?
The Wall Street Journal:
ReplyDelete$30 million has mysteriously flooded a popular predictions market, all betting on one side of the election
But what does the Woke Street Journal know about markets?