Showdown: Trump Vs Haley. Bitcoin betting on the 2024 US Presidential Election

[nullama]

What this shows to me is that the US is extremely divided.

It's almost like there are two countries inside one, and getting more extreme views every year.

This wasn't like this 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, it's really tight, so good luck to whoever wins!

[1714217594]

1714217594

[1714217594]

1714217594

[1714217594]

1714217594

[1714217594]

1714217594

[Sithara007]

Hillary wasn't extreme leftist, and she was still considered unfit to rule, and Kamala is extreme leftist and she is considered unfit to rule, are we entirely sure this is about their ideas and not about the fact that they are women?

I am pretty sure that no matter who you find, it will always look like there is a reason for them to be unfit to rule. On top of that, Kamala doesn't even have extreme leftist ideas, AOC even doesn't have it, nobody in the USA has "extreme leftist" ideas, the most extreme leftist person in the USA was Bernie Sanders, and he got closer to being elected than any other women that has ever tried before. Hence, we can say that you could be a literal self proclaimed socialist, and if you are a man, you could get close to being elected.

Kamala, Nancy Pelosi, AOC.etc are politicians with very high unfavorable ratings. And those ratings have a lot to do with their policies and allegations of corruption rather than being a female. If you want to look at female politicians with high approval ratings, look at senators such as Tammy Baldwin, Maria Cantwell and Maggie Hassan.

BTW, I don't think that we need to debate on the suitability of Kamala anymore. Biden is very close to announce his intention to run for POTUS 2024. Check this article from NY Post:

https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/joe-biden-all-in-and-readying-launch-of-2024-campaign/

Given his approval ratings (40% to 45%), I would have expected him to step down and pass on the baton to someone like Pete Buttigieg or Gavin Newsom. But given the pathetic state of the GOP right now and infighting there, even if the Dems nominate someone like Kim Kardashian or Justin Bieber, they will win easily.

[OgNasty]

What this shows to me is that the US is extremely divided.

It's almost like there are two countries inside one, and getting more extreme views every year.

This wasn't like this 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, it's really tight, so good luck to whoever wins!

Yes, it’s pretty crazy. I feel like there’s the party of reality and the party of crazies being manipulated for votes to enslave us all on behalf of the government. The idea that people pick their own genders was cute at first, but it’s turned into widespread mental illness where crazy people are giving little kids sex changes and begging for the government to save them from the flu while trying to demonize people who won’t participate in their fantasies. The American dream now is to get away from the government and mentally ill leftists.

[Hispo]

What this shows to me is that the US is extremely divided.

It's almost like there are two countries inside one, and getting more extreme views every year.

This wasn't like this 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, it's really tight, so good luck to whoever wins!

It is not a surprise if you keep in mind the way of the mainstream media manages the political division, they actually fearmonger and continue to further divide the population for whatever reason.

You could say that deep red states are certainly very different from those where democrats have a strong base. Texas-California is a good example, completely different policies on gun control, energy, etc.

[EarnOnVictor]

What this shows to me is that the US is extremely divided.

It's almost like there are two countries inside one, and getting more extreme views every year.

This wasn't like this 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, it's really tight, so good luck to whoever wins!

I almost make mistake myself as you might not know that the OP reads January 2021, and I believe that it's too early to know who will contest now. First God owns our lives, secondly, the primaries are still far ahead, and anything can change at the dead moment. Who knows if the court cases of Trump would bar him from contesting as he and his company/foundation were found guilty of some. What about the misuse of office while he was there?

Nonetheless, the presidential election will be taking more shape about the end of this year against 2024, and a viable prediction will be advised then. I believe that inflation, a high-interest rate, and a weak tone against China among others will work to the disadvantage of Biden.

[RealMalatesta]

Kamala, Nancy Pelosi, AOC.etc are politicians with very high unfavorable ratings. And those ratings have a lot to do with their policies and allegations of corruption rather than being a female. If you want to look at female politicians with high approval ratings, look at senators such as Tammy Baldwin, Maria Cantwell and Maggie Hassan.

BTW, I don't think that we need to debate on the suitability of Kamala anymore. Biden is very close to announce his intention to run for POTUS 2024. Check this article from NY Post:

https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/joe-biden-all-in-and-readying-launch-of-2024-campaign/

Given his approval ratings (40% to 45%), I would have expected him to step down and pass on the baton to someone like Pete Buttigieg or Gavin Newsom. But given the pathetic state of the GOP right now and infighting there, even if the Dems nominate someone like Kim Kardashian or Justin Bieber, they will win easily.

All those three are white women, and kamala is not, neither AOC, which is why people dislike them and nothing more. You want proof? One of the people you named is leading the LGBTQ+ community in congress right now, as far left as it gets idea and not even supported fully in democrat party, and she was seen as "acceptable" to you. Kamala is not leftist, not at all, AOC is, there is a difference between them, and Bernie is even more left than AOC, and yet like I said neither Kamala nor AOC was seen acceptable whereas Bernie was, there is absolutely no idea aside from them being women of color that prevents their nomination being acceptable.

But I digress, Biden will be nominated again, and he definitely lacks the brain capacity to run a nation and yet for some reason or other, USA will pick him again, interestingly the correct choice to make, a brain dead Biden is still better than Trump for them, I would agree.

[uneng]

Kamala, Nancy Pelosi, AOC.etc are politicians with very high unfavorable ratings. And those ratings have a lot to do with their policies and allegations of corruption rather than being a female. If you want to look at female politicians with high approval ratings, look at senators such as Tammy Baldwin, Maria Cantwell and Maggie Hassan.

BTW, I don't think that we need to debate on the suitability of Kamala anymore. Biden is very close to announce his intention to run for POTUS 2024. Check this article from NY Post:

https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/joe-biden-all-in-and-readying-launch-of-2024-campaign/

Given his approval ratings (40% to 45%), I would have expected him to step down and pass on the baton to someone like Pete Buttigieg or Gavin Newsom. But given the pathetic state of the GOP right now and infighting there, even if the Dems nominate someone like Kim Kardashian or Justin Bieber, they will win easily.

All those three are white women, and kamala is not, neither AOC, which is why people dislike them and nothing more. You want proof? One of the people you named is leading the LGBTQ+ community in congress right now, as far left as it gets idea and not even supported fully in democrat party, and she was seen as "acceptable" to you. Kamala is not leftist, not at all, AOC is, there is a difference between them, and Bernie is even more left than AOC, and yet like I said neither Kamala nor AOC was seen acceptable whereas Bernie was, there is absolutely no idea aside from them being women of color that prevents their nomination being acceptable.

But I digress, Biden will be nominated again, and he definitely lacks the brain capacity to run a nation and yet for some reason or other, USA will pick him again, interestingly the correct choice to make, a brain dead Biden is still better than Trump for them, I would agree.

I don't think USA has any bias about having a woman as president. All these women mentioned are democracts, so naturally the conservative portion of the country won't vote for them, not because they are women, but due to their globalist agenda.

If there were a woman candidate in the form of the italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, I believe that hypothetical woman would have chances of replacing Trump, gaining support from conservative voters towards the White House. The liberal portion of the country wouldn't vote for her, though. And again, not due to her being a woman, but due to her being a conservative.

[STT]

getting more extreme views every year.

Volatility is rising in multiple areas, politics and many sectors are increasing their rates of change.   Money obviously we expect to alter drastically.   Trump as a candidate was a first by entering and winning without usual experience in either politics or leadership via military, he had neither just business which had not been done before like that.   Not just Trump but also Obama was considered extremely new to run for president in that way and surprisingly win the amount of support that he did so quickly at a young age.  This highlights change is bigger then either side of politics and is not just a speech mantra but a ongoing phenomena across the country also imo the world.
  We have to expect more of the same in some way.   Biden is a fall back to a known face and very experienced figure, regardless of your likes or dislikes just purely judging these names for betting prospects.   Who is the wild card this time, that might be the best bet for improvement in odds, as the race progresses its not a normal bet that the odds can alter far more drastically then most bets we could consider.                                                                            

[nullama]

~snip~
Volatility is rising in multiple areas, politics and many sectors are increasing their rates of change.   Money obviously we expect to alter drastically.   Trump as a candidate was a first by entering and winning without usual experience in either politics or leadership via military, he had neither just business which had not been done before like that.   Not just Trump but also Obama was considered extremely new to run for president in that way and surprisingly win the amount of support that he did so quickly at a young age.  This highlights change is bigger then either side of politics and is not just a speech mantra but a ongoing phenomena across the country also imo the world.
  We have to expect more of the same in some way.   Biden is a fall back to a known face and very experienced figure, regardless of your likes or dislikes just purely judging these names for betting prospects.   Who is the wild card this time, that might be the best bet for improvement in odds, as the race progresses its not a normal bet that the odds can alter far more drastically then most bets we could consider.                                                                            

I think it's because of how the Internet has become so centralized these days.

Back in the day it was the radio, then TV, and now it's internet.

You can now present personalized streams of content to manipulate the minds of billions of people.

That's powerful, and that's being used to divide countries.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

   -   The election is still far away, it seems that the previous one is already being campaigning. As for the matter here in our country, less than 1 year after the elections ended, there is someone who immediately wants to campaign for the next election, it's 6 years before there will be another one, and it's obvious that the name is only making people smell good for now so that people can remember him and make him smell good even if it does not perform the job well as an officer.

Now, let's get back to the subject. If when Trump was President he was defeated by Biden who did not have a position in the government, how can it be that now that Biden is president and Trump does not have any position in their government? It seems far from winning the election in my opinion.

[RealMalatesta]

  -   The election is still far away, it seems that the previous one is already being campaigning. As for the matter here in our country, less than 1 year after the elections ended, there is someone who immediately wants to campaign for the next election, it's 6 years before there will be another one, and it's obvious that the name is only making people smell good for now so that people can remember him and make him smell good even if it does not perform the job well as an officer.

Now, let's get back to the subject. If when Trump was President he was defeated by Biden who did not have a position in the government, how can it be that now that Biden is president and Trump does not have any position in their government? It seems far from winning the election in my opinion.

The difference is that Biden was never elected a president before, and Trump was the president, sure Biden had a Vice Presidency but never the president. Which meant that we didn't know how good or bad Biden would be as a President. As non-American, I am guessing that after 4 years of Trump presidency, millions of people were ready to just vote him out, they didn't care who was the president, they just wanted the candidate to be "not-trump" and that was enough. This is why there was a big chance that Biden could win, and he did.

The same logic applies here, we do not know if Trump could win or not, but we have seen Trump be president for 4 years, and it was a terrible period, so many will still pick Biden, but now Biden is the president too, so that may change some stuff.

[Chikito]

https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/politics/us-presidential-election-odds/#Candidate

The odds always change every day, and we don't know who the favorite is until next November 2024. Maybe better to wait until Halving 2024 for just want to see who a candidate is very pro to bitcoin. Trump, maybe I bit love him because while being president not involved in the war, but his crypto policy is not popular, seems like a negative tendency.

so whoever wins, If crypto-friendly and doesn't like the war, I will support him.

[Hispo]

-snip-

I could be wrong, but the last I checked Trump actually said Bitcoin "seemed to be a scam" and I do not remember any democrat politician being pro-Bitcoin or blockchain in general. Only some hard republicans talk good about Bitcoin, mostly because it's decentralized nature and because the political left can't controlled it.

Ted Cruz is a good example of a pro Bitcoin Republican.

[Sithara007]

https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/politics/us-presidential-election-odds/#Candidate

The odds always change every day, and we don't know who the favorite is until next November 2024. Maybe better to wait until Halving 2024 for just want to see who a candidate is very pro to bitcoin. Trump, maybe I bit love him because while being president not involved in the war, but his crypto policy is not popular, seems like a negative tendency.

so whoever wins, If crypto-friendly and doesn't like the war, I will support him.

Regarding Bitcoin, I couldn't find much difference in the policies of either Trump or Biden. They don't like Bitcoin, but at the same time they haven't taken drastic steps such as criminalizing Bitcoin ownership. This status quo will continue and that will be good enough for us.

And I agree with the odds that you have provided here. As of now, Ron DeSantis is the best candidate the GOP can come up with, while Joe Biden is the most electable candidate for the Democrats. None of the other Democrats for now can attract the independent vote, as they are considered as too extreme. But it is too early, and things can change drastically.

All those three are white women, and kamala is not, neither AOC, which is why people dislike them and nothing more. You want proof? One of the people you named is leading the LGBTQ+ community in congress right now, as far left as it gets idea and not even supported fully in democrat party, and she was seen as "acceptable" to you. Kamala is not leftist, not at all, AOC is, there is a difference between them, and Bernie is even more left than AOC, and yet like I said neither Kamala nor AOC was seen acceptable whereas Bernie was, there is absolutely no idea aside from them being women of color that prevents their nomination being acceptable.

But I digress, Biden will be nominated again, and he definitely lacks the brain capacity to run a nation and yet for some reason or other, USA will pick him again, interestingly the correct choice to make, a brain dead Biden is still better than Trump for them, I would agree.

I don't want to repeat my arguments. But still, if you think that the same people who elected Barack Obama as the president of the United States will have problems with Kamala Harris in the same post (just because of race), then I guess you are wrong.

[nullama]

~snip~
I could be wrong, but the last I checked Trump actually said Bitcoin "seemed to be a scam" and I do not remember any democrat politician being pro-Bitcoin or blockchain in general. Only some hard republicans talk good about Bitcoin, mostly because it's decentralized nature and because the political left can't controlled it.

Ted Cruz is a good example of a pro Bitcoin Republican.

People can change their minds as well.

For example, Michael Saylor used to think negatively about Bitcoin years ago, and now he has completely changed his mind.

At the end of the day, what individuals do doesn't matter too much, the Bitcoin network is already too big.

[davis196]

Why do I have the feeling that this topic is becoming too political. After all, this is a gambling topic posted in the Gambling Discussion forum.
I would bet my money on Ron DeSantis. We don't know whether or not Trump will be allowed to participate in the presidential elections.
Joe Biden going for a second mandate is a joke. Do you imagine the USA having a 80+ year old demented president running the administration for 4 another years in such turbulent times? Kamala Harris will have a better chance as a Democratic candidate. Nancy Pelosi is a joke. She needs to retire.

[LUCKMCFLY]

You don't get what I'm saying, of course Bernie Sanders doesn't care about Russia. But for US politics, Bernie is ultra far left, same as a communist. And a communist can't win a national election in the US.

Aside from that, I don't see Trump winning in 2024, but it will be fun to watch him try. He has a lot of support, but he has also lost a significant amount of it.

So you are saying that if Bernie was the Democrat nominee for 2016 POTUS elections, he could have never won? I am confused, because most of the opinion polls back then showed Bernie with a sizable lead over Trump. And more importantly, Bernie was performing exceptionally well in the rust-belt region, where Trump made most of his gains. His only drawback was that the African American voters refused to support him. But then no one cares about these votes, that are concentrated mostly in the deep-red states such as Alabama, Oklahoma and Mississippi. Democrats never win there.

Hillary Clinton also won all polls.

Still she lost the election.

Bernie was out long before then so knowing what polls would have looked like just before the election is impossible.

Hillary didn't get some of Bernie's supporters votes, but Bernie would have faced the same issue, he would have lost the center left vote.

Well, thinking about a scenario where a left-wing candidate wins an election in the USA, I think I would not see it well, although something is certain, it would fix all relations with countries like Russia and the Middle East, this is something that could cause a Slight calamity, remembering that now the USA is one of the pillar countries for the world economy where most of the high-caliber business is carried out, since something like this could cause companies to go to another country, I would look for another way to emerge while maintaining the status quo that they have in the USA, I would not see it well, besides that it would cause something like a disorder of destabilization, I really do not see it as healthy.

[FanEagle]

I am not an American, so I don't care about their bitcoin ideas, whatever they think about is fine with me. But as American the war thing matters a lot, and even though I hate Trump, and I think he is the worst president as a human we could ever see, he was not someone who liked war at all, and knowing Republicans as the "war hawk" party, it's a very refreshing thing to see a republican president being even less war tendency than democrats.

Biden took over and one of the first things he did was war again, and he hasn't done that ever since, but still... as someone who HATES Trump, I gotta admit, as a foreigner, I prefer a bad president of USA that doesn't attack me, over a good one that may attack me. Let them ruin USA from within without touching us, that is better for us, you can ruin yourself with Trump, I would support that, he could make USA worse, but at least he won't attack me.

[madnessteat]

^

The U.S. economy is very closely linked to the military-industrial complex, so when there is a war, the U.S. is happy to sell its weapons left and right, as long as the buyer has something to pay for them.

I'm not an American either, but I follow a bit of their politics and in my opinion Trump is a preferable president to Biden, who can barely move around anymore.

[Hispo]

~snip~
I could be wrong, but the last I checked Trump actually said Bitcoin "seemed to be a scam" and I do not remember any democrat politician being pro-Bitcoin or blockchain in general. Only some hard republicans talk good about Bitcoin, mostly because it's decentralized nature and because the political left can't controlled it.

Ted Cruz is a good example of a pro Bitcoin Republican.

People can change their minds as well.

For example, Michael Saylor used to think negatively about Bitcoin years ago, and now he has completely changed his mind.

At the end of the day, what individuals do doesn't matter too much, the Bitcoin network is already too big.

If your reply is a reference to the fact Trump endorsed his own NFT collection, I must say that I believe that was not his own idea, but rather some altcoin developer who payed up Trump for him to advertise their NFT and make them official.

Of course, though, I agree with you on the size and importance of the blockchain.