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

[jostorres]

...
My take is - Trump is able to attract sizable number of votes (and at the same time lose almost an equal number of votes), but in the long term he is detrimental to the long term prospects of the Republican Party. He only cares about himself and will go against the party if he doesn't get what he need. This guy has transformed the GOP from a center-right political party to one at the fringe of the political spectrum.

Trump's base does not care about the future of the Republican party, as far as they are concerned, it is a battle between them and the hidden forces who want Trump out the game, and there are actually people within the GOP who are very unpopular among the average Republican voter, aka Mike Pence.

in spite of Trump being what he is, there is still a chance he becomes president again if not indicted this year, that means there will be much people who may bet on his victory if his Democrat rival proves themselves to be "weak" against him.

That is going to help Democrat party seal the future for them as well. We are going to see the whole nation who are against this new Republican party at the Democrat party, not like they were so awesome before, but right now the in fighting of that party made it even worse.

That will cause a lot of rumpus with the voters, there will be republicans fighting republicans which will only help Democrats. Fine by me actually, rather see DP there instead of RP but at the end of the day this will only cause even more trouble in the future for the whole nation, it is not going to go away anytime soon, it is going to be an issue everyone in the whole nation will have to fix, even if not today, eventually one day.

[1714206733]

1714206733

[1714206733]

1714206733

[1714206733]

1714206733

[1714206733]

1714206733

[1714206733]

1714206733

[1714206733]

1714206733

[STT]

What is the most likely outcome is Trump does more harm then good, he splits the vote.  Its a well known situation that this occurs and the precedent is always that the losing candidate for the nomination gives way and recommends the person who got the most votes; for the good of the party.   However does that match up to how Trump generally runs things, giving way in the sportsmanship way is kinda a funny scenario.
  If nothing else Trump raises participation and involvement by the masses and that is the base line for the good of democracy in a country.  However I cant see the amicable debate and concession occurring, I see chaos occurring and party conflict some which means your bets for winner (if not the actual vote & personal sentiment) in an impartial way should be with bias to democrat win overall I think.
 Its possible the man from Florida deftly swings the publicity and votes his way from all sides who knows but that would require great political acumen to pull off I'd guess.  Anyone think he has that in him?

[brooksby]

...
My take is - Trump is able to attract sizable number of votes (and at the same time lose almost an equal number of votes), but in the long term he is detrimental to the long term prospects of the Republican Party. He only cares about himself and will go against the party if he doesn't get what he need. This guy has transformed the GOP from a center-right political party to one at the fringe of the political spectrum.

Trump's base does not care about the future of the Republican party, as far as they are concerned, it is a battle between them and the hidden forces who want Trump out the game, and there are actually people within the GOP who are very unpopular among the average Republican voter, aka Mike Pence.

in spite of Trump being what he is, there is still a chance he becomes president again if not indicted this year, that means there will be much people who may bet on his victory if his Democrat rival proves themselves to be "weak" against him.

That is going to help Democrat party seal the future for them as well. We are going to see the whole nation who are against this new Republican party at the Democrat party, not like they were so awesome before, but right now the in fighting of that party made it even worse.

That will cause a lot of rumpus with the voters, there will be republicans fighting republicans which will only help Democrats. Fine by me actually, rather see DP there instead of RP but at the end of the day this will only cause even more trouble in the future for the whole nation, it is not going to go away anytime soon, it is going to be an issue everyone in the whole nation will have to fix, even if not today, eventually one day.

Ever since the Brexit really happened and ever since Trump won the elections in 2016, I think nothing is impossible anymore. I mean I would expect people to have learnt something from the last elections, how people raided the Capitol with five people dying when Trump publicly called for a riot. Who wants that? And yet Trump has his followers. Last time I thought it was more about entertainment, but now everybody should know that Trump isn't entertaining, the guy is evil. In 2020 the voter turnout was roughly 8% higher than in 2016, which is probably a sign for a good number of people to have woken up back then as they understood the consequences of not casting a vote. One question now is whether those who voted for the democrats last time now also take it seriously that casting no vote brings RP back into the game.

[Sithara007]

Ever since the Brexit really happened and ever since Trump won the elections in 2016, I think nothing is impossible anymore. I mean I would expect people to have learnt something from the last elections, how people raided the Capitol with five people dying when Trump publicly called for a riot. Who wants that? And yet Trump has his followers. Last time I thought it was more about entertainment, but now everybody should know that Trump isn't entertaining, the guy is evil. In 2020 the voter turnout was roughly 8% higher than in 2016, which is probably a sign for a good number of people to have woken up back then as they understood the consequences of not casting a vote. One question now is whether those who voted for the democrats last time now also take it seriously that casting no vote brings RP back into the game.

You are right that the turnout was much higher in 2020, when compared to 2016. Back in 2016, Sanders supporters were not happy with the choice of Hilary and they didn't got out to vote. But in 2020, Joe Biden emerged as a the consensus candidate and that pushed up the voting numbers. But despite all that, the margin in popular vote was not that great. And Trump still received 11 million more votes when compared to what he got in 2016. So there was a polarization from both the sides, with white working class preferring Trump.

And the voting patterns have roughly remained the same, as evident from the results of 2022 midterms. And in swing states, I guess the Democrats have got much stronger. The Republicans have almost written off states such as Arizona, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Michigan, and at the same time they are facing heat in many of the red states like South Carolina, Georgia and Alaska.

[Hispo]

-snip-

-snip-

That is going to help Democrat party seal the future for them as well. We are going to see the whole nation who are against this new Republican party at the Democrat party, not like they were so awesome before, but right now the in fighting of that party made it even worse.

It is not only about new candidates and demagogues that somehow managed to hold the Republican Party hostage with their bad political ideas. It is also about of the demographics and the generational change that is going on in the United States, the so-called "z generation" or zoomers. People who are more liberal and welcoming to people of color and Hispanics.

If the Republican party wants to catch some votes, needs to appeal towards a new generation of voters, assuming the party manages to escape from the influence of Trump and his enablers.

[dezoel]

That is going to help Democrat party seal the future for them as well. We are going to see the whole nation who are against this new Republican party at the Democrat party, not like they were so awesome before, but right now the in fighting of that party made it even worse.

There is also the one where he fell from the bike as well. He is old, he is definitely very old, there is no doubt about that. However, at this point Republicans are a bit more in trouble than democrats about it, why? Because imagine a country that voted for a guy that was too old to do the job, instead of picking their candidate who was on a reelection campaign.

Trump had 4 years of presidency, and yet he couldn't get reelected against a guy who can't even finish a sentence. This is why it's quite important to realize that Republicans are responsible for finding a candidate that could actually get the votes to win, otherwise they are going to lose again.

[Sithara007]

It is not only about new candidates and demagogues that somehow managed to hold the Republican Party hostage with their bad political ideas. It is also about of the demographics and the generational change that is going on in the United States, the so-called "z generation" or zoomers. People who are more liberal and welcoming to people of color and Hispanics.

If the Republican party wants to catch some votes, needs to appeal towards a new generation of voters, assuming the party manages to escape from the influence of Trump and his enablers.

The American demographics have undergone very rapid change between 1990 and 2020, and we can't deny the impact of this in the voting patterns. As per the 2020 Census, non-Hispanic whites comprise a bare majority now (57.8%), compared to 75.7% in 1990. The minority population has doubled in proportion between 1990 and 2020. The white population actually decreased by 5 million during the last decade. And the disadvantage with GOP is that their core voter base is comprised of middle-aged and elderly white voters, and that too mostly male.

[Pierre 2]

It is not only about new candidates and demagogues that somehow managed to hold the Republican Party hostage with their bad political ideas. It is also about of the demographics and the generational change that is going on in the United States, the so-called "z generation" or zoomers. People who are more liberal and welcoming to people of color and Hispanics.

If the Republican party wants to catch some votes, needs to appeal towards a new generation of voters, assuming the party manages to escape from the influence of Trump and his enablers.

The American demographics have undergone very rapid change between 1990 and 2020, and we can't deny the impact of this in the voting patterns. As per the 2020 Census, non-Hispanic whites comprise a bare majority now (57.8%), compared to 75.7% in 1990. The minority population has doubled in proportion between 1990 and 2020. The white population actually decreased by 5 million during the last decade. And the disadvantage with GOP is that their core voter base is comprised of middle-aged and elderly white voters, and that too mostly male.

Definitely good data you have. I definitely agree with this change. Its not even exclusive to USA. Many European countries had huge population moves from around the world.
I also wanna add to this honestly, I am pretty sure young generations are less xenophobic and more liberal. They are nearly always pro-minority. White nationalism is seen as something very eccentric and poisonous. These obviously influence voting. USA had low turnout rate in past but now these new "gen z" likes politics. This is actually positive for USA in my opinion.

[Sithara007]

Definitely good data you have. I definitely agree with this change. Its not even exclusive to USA. Many European countries had huge population moves from around the world.
I also wanna add to this honestly, I am pretty sure young generations are less xenophobic and more liberal. They are nearly always pro-minority. White nationalism is seen as something very eccentric and poisonous. These obviously influence voting. USA had low turnout rate in past but now these new "gen z" likes politics. This is actually positive for USA in my opinion.

Actually this is something that is unique to the United States. I don't think that any of the European countries have undergone transformation of this magnitude. Among all the European nations, Sweden may be the country with the largest share of migrants. Even there, the migrants and their descendants comprise only around 20% of the population. In case of the United States, recent migrants (post-1945) and their descendants comprise almost half of the population. And I am not sure whether this has led to a decrease in xenophobia, because I am reading about a lot of racist incidents nowadays.

Now coming back to the topic, the failure from the part of GOP is that they have failed to attract the recent immigrants (except the white immigrants). Among Asian, African and Hispanic immigrants, the GOP trails the Dems by at least 40-45 points. There have always been sections of non-whites in the US who have supported the GOP. Examples are Vietnamese migrants who opposed Viet Kong, evangelist Hispanics and Cubans. But Republicans have failed to expand their support base apart from these core groups.

[brooksby]

That is going to help Democrat party seal the future for them as well. We are going to see the whole nation who are against this new Republican party at the Democrat party, not like they were so awesome before, but right now the in fighting of that party made it even worse.

There is also the one where he fell from the bike as well. He is old, he is definitely very old, there is no doubt about that. However, at this point Republicans are a bit more in trouble than democrats about it, why? Because imagine a country that voted for a guy that was too old to do the job, instead of picking their candidate who was on a reelection campaign.

Trump had 4 years of presidency, and yet he couldn't get reelected against a guy who can't even finish a sentence. This is why it's quite important to realize that Republicans are responsible for finding a candidate that could actually get the votes to win, otherwise they are going to lose again.

Just from a strategic point of view I think you hit the nail on the head. Trump is polarizing the people and polarizing often means that half of the crowd loves you and the other half hates you. That is essentially the goal of being a polarizing character. The advantage is that you have hardcore advocates guaranteed. When you are a handsome guy you might not be heard enough and just drown in the noise that others make.

In this case it is true what you say, the Republicans shouldn't want a candidate who polarizes. They would be better off with a candidate who is more handsome like Biden, but more energetic and enthusiastic. That could take votes away from the Democrats.

Something I am not sure about yet is if Biden is going to try it again. I think it is a tough call and this is not because I think he is a bad president, but age will come into play especially for him (and already is), and we are not talking about another year of presidency, but five years. I would even say it would be undeserving if he had to cancel his presidency in the middle of his term.

Hard to say, but despite his age I think he is doing a good job. He is shaky in his voice, and shaky with his body, sometimes shaky in his mind, but his political content and strategy isn't. That's just my opinion.

[famososMuertos]

What is the most likely outcome is Trump does more harm then good, he splits the vote.  Its a well known situation that this occurs and the precedent is always that the losing candidate for the nomination gives way and recommends the person who got the most votes; for the good of the party.   However does that match up to how Trump generally runs things, giving way in the sportsmanship way is kinda a funny scenario.
  If nothing else Trump raises participation and involvement by the masses and that is the base line for the good of democracy in a country.  However I cant see the amicable debate and concession occurring, I see chaos occurring and party conflict some which means your bets for winner (if not the actual vote & personal sentiment) in an impartial way should be with bias to democrat win overall I think.
 Its possible the man from Florida deftly swings the publicity and votes his way from all sides who knows but that would require great political acumen to pull off I'd guess.  Anyone think he has that in him?

I think that he already demonstrated it, in fact, he could because they ignored it and/or perhaps they asked themselves that same question, which you pose very well given your context, DT always it confuses in reality and it always seems to be limited, but something arises and not unforeseen, which is Perhaps his greatest weapon, making others believe that he has no exits, but he certainly finds them.

[ChiBitCTy]

I honestly hope that Biden Vs Trump never happens and I think there is a good chance that it doesn't.  Biden has of course lost the favor of many Americans who voted for him, as well as there's countless Americans who can't stand Trump.  Even the Republican party is starting to turn on Trump, so I'm not sure either of these two old farts will even be chosen or choose to run again, or hell even be alive by the time election day rolls around lol.

[o48o]

-cut-
Even the Republican party is starting to turn on Trump
-cut-

If my memory serves me right, didn't they do that last time as well before he was their main candidate? And soon after they realized he is winning they turned to praise anything he said as spineless as they are. If DeSantis seems to b losing they will ditch him too and praise that traitorous clown again.

[Hispo]

-snip-

And the disadvantage with GOP is that their core voter base is comprised of middle-aged and elderly white voters, and that too mostly male.

And yet there are Republican candidates that are considering to bring a cut on social security onto the table, in order to save money and decrease the deficit.  
The party is in trouble, if you asked me, they do not want to be more open-minded to bring younger people to vote for them and could cut money which effectively benefits their base. Does not make much sense, the only explanation I can find is they are being influenced by their corporate donors.

[Sithara007]

And yet there are Republican candidates that are considering to bring a cut on social security onto the table, in order to save money and decrease the deficit.  
The party is in trouble, if you asked me, they do not want to be more open-minded to bring younger people to vote for them and could cut money which effectively benefits their base. Does not make much sense, the only explanation I can find is they are being influenced by their corporate donors.

What is wrong in that? The federal debt has been ballooning to unsustainable levels in the United States. The growth has been especially steep since 2010. And a large part of this was wasteful spending, in the form of wars and additional funding for the unions. I am not sure whether the younger people would vote for a party which only provides them with freebies. If I am in their place, I would vote for a party that would improve the economy so that more better paying jobs are created. Distributing freebies will work in the short term, but in the long term it will have a negative impact. 

[Hispo]

-snip-

I am not sure whether the younger people would vote for a party which only provides them with freebies.

Depends whom you ask, I think.
I have talked to people from the United States who are fairly young and mostly supportive of democrats, and they have told me their healthcare system is essentially unfair or "broken" and they social security should not be cut.

But that is only what I have heard, they are mostly in favor of increasing taxes to the wealthy in order to decrease de deficit, some people may call it socialism or communism or even punishing success.


Still expecting to see whether Republicans shifty increase the debt ceiling this summer or not.

[Sithara007]

Depends whom you ask, I think.
I have talked to people from the United States who are fairly young and mostly supportive of democrats, and they have told me their healthcare system is essentially unfair or "broken" and they social security should not be cut.

But that is only what I have heard, they are mostly in favor of increasing taxes to the wealthy in order to decrease de deficit, some people may call it socialism or communism or even punishing success.

When I was young, I was also a strong supporter of Socialism. But once I got a job and had to manage the expenses, I realized that there is nothing like free money. I am not against providing free medical care or education to everyone. But the Democrats go overboard, by just splurging free money to anyone they like. But be it the GOP or the Democrats, none of the parties are actually interested in fixing the rotten medical care system in the United States. The same medical procedure which costs $1,000 or $2,000 in Singapore costs as much as $25,000 in the United States. Even medicines for common illnesses such as Diabetes and hypertension costs 10x or 20x more in the United States when compared to Canada or Mexico. I am wondering why the so called "socialist" politicians are not interested in bringing down the rates.

[Hispo]

-snip-

When I was young, I was also a strong supporter of Socialism. But once I got a job and had to manage the expenses, I realized that there is nothing like free money. I am not against providing free medical care or education to everyone. But the Democrats go overboard, by just splurging free money to anyone they like. But be it the GOP or the Democrats, none of the parties are actually interested in fixing the rotten medical care system in the United States. The same medical procedure which costs $1,000 or $2,000 in Singapore costs as much as $25,000 in the United States. Even medicines for common illnesses such as Diabetes and hypertension costs 10x or 20x more in the United States when compared to Canada or Mexico. I am wondering why the so called "socialist" politicians are not interested in bringing down the rates.

Probably because they, their families and their donors may be owners of private hospitals?
Even within the democrat party I believe it is difficult to find someone who may actually be against the private property.

Also, wasn't Biden bragging about capping the maximum price of insulin for those in Medicaid some weeks ago? If I recall correctly it was 30$ per vial, wasn't it?
Still, what he has done is very different from setting a maximum price on insulin nationwide, which would be very drastic in the eyes on many people there.

[Sithara007]

Also, wasn't Biden bragging about capping the maximum price of insulin for those in Medicaid some weeks ago? If I recall correctly it was 30$ per vial, wasn't it?
Still, what he has done is very different from setting a maximum price on insulin nationwide, which would be very drastic in the eyes on many people there.

Here in India, a vial of insulin typically costs around $1.50. And I understand that the prices are at least 50x higher in the United States. And what is causing this difference? Why can't they just import the vials from India (or any other country) and distribute it among the diabetics? I have read some news reports from the United States, where diabetics were claiming that they ended up with kidney damage since they couldn't afford insulin doses. And we are talking about the United States and not some third world country.

[Hispo]

-snip-
 

-snip-

I thought you were from the United States, my bad.
Well, I don't know. I assume it must have something to do with the business of health there, actually I have a friend who is on insulin and in medicaid. He told me that if he lost the insurance he would have to pay over 1600$ a month for insulin. Which is too much.

When comes to betting on politicians, unfortunately the topic of healthcare is not taken much into consideration, in comparison to the so called "culture wars". You do not see Trump talking about healthcare solutions on TV or on his social media and yet he has managed to get 50% of the republican votes on his favor.