2024 U.S. Presidential Election Bets!

[FanEagle]

The interesting thins some Americans seem to forget is the fact that Kamala isn't the president, she is the vice president, virtually a useless position aside from making the president look good with another demographic to get some more votes, but the abilities and power of VP is quite limited. So saying Kamala is the one in charge and hasn't done anything feels a little bit weird. But even with that in mind, thinking that the last four years with Biden was "worse" than the 4 years with Trump, is a bit of a stretch.

I mean we have seen over 5k people dead every single day because of Trump. That means, if he shot one person per hour, he would have killed a lot less people, and yet you think Trump was better than this current one? Well that's the beauty of democracy, if you really think trumps 4 year was better than Bidens (not kamala's) four year then go ahead and vote for Trump, because that's how elections work and in this benefit, you think Kamala is in charge now so basically you saw both candidates rule the nation, decide which four years were better.

[STT]

Supporting crypto should be seen as tech related and supporting a business growth area.   Its not really a gift for government not to ruin something, both sides regardless of politics should not be standing in the way of something productive.

  Genuine growth worldwide in a new sector is going to be in demand for a number of countries.  If the business grows and eventually makes more enough to pay taxes then you want that, especially for employment and a number of fronts.   I cant see I have to favor either side for a common sense position of allowing valid business.

you think Trump was better than this current one? Well that's the beauty of democracy,

It is surprising for Trump to get another chance yet here we are.   Cant really argue with what the people want.   My view of it is as a part in opposition, I can easily believe every 4 years people grow tired and want another choice besides more of the same.   We could just write it off as people are more changeable less loyal in their votes now, they are willing to spin the wheel and see what happens.
   Forget the names involved, we can believe people are fed up enough to vote for a change in office so a Republican win can happen.

[bbc.reporter]

...
It appears that you are creating an argument based on how you want to interpret the other argument heheheheh. What is being argued is the comedy of Kamala Harris where if she will say that she will do better than the Biden administration, this will be very much similar to an admission that she, being part of the Biden administration, did not do her duty very well for the people hehehehe.

Realistically speaking, this incoming election is not actually for the people to choose a change of direction for the country or not. It is rather a referendum on whether the people of the USA are willing to give Trump another chance. The role of Kamala Harris as current Vice-president of the country is irrelevant for the average democrat voter, it is about voting against Trump, instead "voting for Harris". Anyone would have become the nominee in order to replace Joe Biden and still the average democrat voter would still give the support to such person over Trump.
Keeping that in mind, recently Obama took the stage to further make his support for Kamala and Walz clear, by calling out Donald Trump. Considering how popular Obama was back in the day, I would not be surprised he managed to swing some undecided voters in favor of Kamala. Also, it is interesting how Josh Bush has not dared to endorse Trump in the Republican convention, he (Bush) knows the Republican party is not the same it used to be and the core Republican values have been replaced by Trump talking points and conspiracy theories.

I would argue that the winner of this election on November is not a referendum on whether the people want to give the Donald Trump another chance or not. This will be a referendum of whether the people think that Joe Biden has improved America or not.

If Biden and Kamala did very well under their administration, where the people felt some improvement in their lives, would the American people give Trump another chance? I would be very certain that they will not give him another chance.

[OcTradism]

I would argue that the winner of this election on November is not a referendum on whether the people want to give the Donald Trump another chance or not. This will be a referendum of whether the people think that Joe Biden has improved America or not.

I don't argue here about two possible reasons you are discussing: giving Trump another chance, Joe Biden improved America last four years; but assume a decisive reason for this election winner is the second reason, that is what you want to discuss here. With this reason, I believe Biden failed in his administration and when people realized it through actual impacts on their life quality and security, they will reflect their willingness in the election, and Kamala will fail.

If Biden and Kamala did very well under their administration, where the people felt some improvement in their lives, would the American people give Trump another chance? I would be very certain that they will not give him another chance.

If most of US citizens think Biden and Kamala improved their lives last four years, they will vote for Kamala to have 4 more years with administration from Democratic Party.

We will know what the US citizens feel about Biden and Harris administration in the next month.

[Sithara007]

Both sides of the fence are crooks.  I can name a zillion things both sides went back on their pre election word on.  I mean as a front yeah trump looks pro bitcoin but he knows there is a large vote he can get from crypto supporters which is now a significant portion of voters.  I don't believe a word any of them say until I see it.  Going to be a rough go on election day trying to figure out which button to push.  300million people and we get these 2 to choose from.  That's the insane thing here.

I agree with parts of your statement. But I don't agree when you claim that Trump will gain huge number of votes if he supports Bitcoin. How many active Bitcoin users are there in the United States? I mean someone with at least BTC0.1 in his wallet? I would say that the number maybe less than a million. And most of them will be white guys in their 20s or 30s, who has no intention to vote. And how much of this number will shift their voting preferences just because of pro-BTC statements from Trump? Maybe <100k? That would translate to a few hundred votes in swing states such as Nevada and Pennsylvania.

[TwitchySeal]

Both sides of the fence are crooks.  I can name a zillion things both sides went back on their pre election word on.

Bullshit.

Not keeping a campaign promise, or changing your view on some issue does not make you the same kind of "crook" as taking a bunch of classified documents with you after losing an election and then hiding them from the government as a civilian, or inciting an insurrection, or defaming the woman you finger raped, or taking illegal donations from other countries and hiding them and then repaying the donation with policy as president, or running a scam charity, or running a scam university, or running a corporation found guilty in criminal court of felony fraud, or lying to state election officials about voter fraud to pressure them to "find you enough votes" to win.


Just because you can find a few instances of Kamala changing her view on not keeping campaign promises does not mean she is a crook like Trump.

Just because you can find examples of Kamala being dishonest does not mean she is a liar like Trump.

[Sithara007]

It really troubles me that the opinion polls and betting markets are predicting diametrically opposite outcomes for the POTUS elections next month. And all this, with just 20 more days to go for the actual start of the elections.

This is what Polymarket says (big advantage for Trump):

And here is the prediction from SienaResearch (Kamala 270, Trump 268):

[Poker Player]

...

This is what Polymarket says (big advantage for Trump):
...

And here is the prediction from SienaResearch (Kamala 270, Trump 268):
...

Well, statistics is not an exact science, far from it. Leaving aside what you put, which may have some electoral bias, I'll put a screenshot of yesterday from my casino:



That by giving those odds he considers Trump with an advantage. But I don't trust even that to predict the outcome of the election. Considering that everything is at stake in a few swing states I would say that either one can win.

Just because you can find examples of Kamala being dishonest does not mean she is a liar like Trump.

Lol.

[STT]

As far as betting goes they just opened up political bets on this election to all of USA not just the online crowd so much; just the sheer traffic of people who have an interest in 'the game' probably makes this subject the biggest bet of the year.

With 188,000 early votes already placed in Georgia, does this indicate the turnout for actual votes placed could make this election for involvement the most important ever.   Alot of modern elections in modern countries suffer a poor turn out and so reflect badly on democratic determination.  Whatever you think of these two candidates if the vote count is high it helps to certify the election as valid imo.

Also Trump is predicted to win in the last poll I read though not by much.

[Hispo]

...

It should not trouble you at all, I believe that it is completely normal when comes to comparing people who answer a simple question in a survey and people who put their money where their mouth is. After taking a look at polymarket, it seems to me Trump is about to win this presidential race by a razor thin margin in November, I have always though betting markets are more reliable than those polls, even if the percentage of error is relatively low.

I am yet waiting for the last minute before I can place some major bet on the table, this is October and right before the election there is supposed to be a political surprise, which may change the direction of both the normal polls and the betting markets.


Also, today I read there is a possible case of someone in California who was trying to kill Trump, but he was stopped before he could do anything. Kind of disturbing how many people are genuinely willing to ruin for life for the sake of killing a politician...

[Sithara007]

It should not trouble you at all, I believe that it is completely normal when comes to comparing people who answer a simple question in a survey and people who put their money where their mouth is. After taking a look at polymarket, it seems to me Trump is about to win this presidential race by a razor thin margin in November, I have always though betting markets are more reliable than those polls, even if the percentage of error is relatively low.

I am yet waiting for the last minute before I can place some major bet on the table, this is October and right before the election there is supposed to be a political surprise, which may change the direction of both the normal polls and the betting markets.


Also, today I read there is a possible case of someone in California who was trying to kill Trump, but he was stopped before he could do anything. Kind of disturbing how many people are genuinely willing to ruin for life for the sake of killing a politician...

The difference between these two also means that a lot of people in the United States are still afraid to openly state that they are voting for Trump. This happened back in 2016, and again in 2020 as well. Opinion polls under-estimated the support level for Trump, because a lot of people hid their voting intention due to threats from the left-wing. I am not sure whether the scenario has changed or not. If it hasn't changed, then Trump will win 2024 POTUS elections by a landslide (because opinion polls are putting him in a position much better than what was there either in 2016 or 2020).

[bbc.reporter]

I would argue that the winner of this election on November is not a referendum on whether the people want to give the Donald Trump another chance or not. This will be a referendum of whether the people think that Joe Biden has improved America or not.

I don't argue here about two possible reasons you are discussing: giving Trump another chance, Joe Biden improved America last four years; but assume a decisive reason for this election winner is the second reason, that is what you want to discuss here. With this reason, I believe Biden failed in his administration and when people realized it through actual impacts on their life quality and security, they will reflect their willingness in the election, and Kamala will fail.

If Biden and Kamala did very well under their administration, where the people felt some improvement in their lives, would the American people give Trump another chance? I would be very certain that they will not give him another chance.

If most of US citizens think Biden and Kamala improved their lives last four years, they will vote for Kamala to have 4 more years with administration from Democratic Party.

We will know what the US citizens feel about Biden and Harris administration in the next month.

Agreed on your argument. But I was only creating a fair assessment on the reasons why the voters will vote on either Trump or Kamala.

In any case, there was someone who mentioned that it was funny for him if people consider Polymarket as a basis for the candidates' ratings on the election. I have thought about this and I presently consider his argument very uneducated because it can be argued that polls can have personal and political bias. Prediction markets do not have a bias because participants enter this to be right to win the money.

If my argument is correct and if this pump on Trump's ratings on Polymarket continue, it appears that the next president will be a Republican.

[fruktik]

I agree with parts of your statement. But I don't agree when you claim that Trump will gain huge number of votes if he supports Bitcoin. How many active Bitcoin users are there in the United States? I mean someone with at least BTC0.1 in his wallet? I would say that the number maybe less than a million. And most of them will be white guys in their 20s or 30s, who has no intention to vote. And how much of this number will shift their voting preferences just because of pro-BTC statements from Trump? Maybe <100k? That would translate to a few hundred votes in swing states such as Nevada and Pennsylvania.

If you think about it, the number of cryptos is not that big. Until now, I had a different position, but now I understand that it is wrong. Indeed, there is no point in politicians getting into such debates about crypto. It makes no sense, since the number of voters who are related to blockchain technology and its derivatives is not that big. Why then is Trump so diligently pedaling this topic? What good does it do him? Why such loud statements and concrete actions? Does he really think that this will help him in any way?

[Yaunfitda]

I agree with parts of your statement. But I don't agree when you claim that Trump will gain huge number of votes if he supports Bitcoin. How many active Bitcoin users are there in the United States? I mean someone with at least BTC0.1 in his wallet? I would say that the number maybe less than a million. And most of them will be white guys in their 20s or 30s, who has no intention to vote. And how much of this number will shift their voting preferences just because of pro-BTC statements from Trump? Maybe <100k? That would translate to a few hundred votes in swing states such as Nevada and Pennsylvania.

If you think about it, the number of cryptos is not that big. Until now, I had a different position, but now I understand that it is wrong. Indeed, there is no point in politicians getting into such debates about crypto. It makes no sense, since the number of voters who are related to blockchain technology and its derivatives is not that big. Why then is Trump so diligently pedaling this topic? What good does it do him? Why such loud statements and concrete actions? Does he really think that this will help him in any way?

But the thing is that Trump knows that there Bitcoin has been a hot topic, and there are a lot of gray area's as far as US goes like in mining and then regulation. However, this is the perfect time for him to used it as a agenda for his re-election. And as we can see, even non-US residents are still divided whether it was a good idea to elect Trump base on this alone of if Bitcoin enthusiast are going to vote for him. Of course we don't know the numbers on how many US voters are into Bitcoin or crypto in general. But perhaps what Trump did here is to awaken those non-Bitcoin voters, and who knows, maybe he can sway them to vote for him because of his friendly stance. Or at least pro-crypto might have to talk about about it with their friends and persuade them to go with Trump at least.

[Fiatless]

If you think about it, the number of cryptos is not that big. Until now, I had a different position, but now I understand that it is wrong. Indeed, there is no point in politicians getting into such debates about crypto. It makes no sense, since the number of voters who are related to blockchain technology and its derivatives is not that big. Why then is Trump so diligently pedaling this topic? What good does it do him? Why such loud statements and concrete actions? Does he really think that this will help him in any way?

Politicians want to get as many votes as possible. They are willing to use anything to campaign no matter how small the population is. A small amount of votes can be significant to the victory of a candidate. I also suspect that Trump is using the crypto platform to raise funds for his campaign. Major crypto businesses are donating towards his campaign.     

[satscraper]

the number of voters who are related to blockchain technology and its derivatives is not that big. Why then is Trump so diligently pedaling this topic?

Because he holds on the coming opportunity   like a grim death and think that that minority would weighs down the existing  balance at the election. Thus he vomits up from his mouth those words that caress the ear of crypto lovers. But the humor of his plight is that he thick as two short planks and don't understand the kernel of crypto ^{(which is freedom)} thus all his wording is blank, because, should  he be elected America will turn into autocratic state ^{(yeah, this is his stance - to make America autocratic)} similar to Russia or North Korea. ^{(BTW, he acknowledged that Putin and Kim are his best buddies)}.

[Haunebu]

I have thought about this and I presently consider his argument very uneducated because it can be argued that polls can have personal and political bias. Prediction markets do not have a bias because participants enter this to be right to win the money.

If my argument is correct and if this pump on Trump's ratings on Polymarket continue, it appears that the next president will be a Republican.

Your reasoning makes zero sense here. Betting markets can obviously be manipulated to a great extent since it's all just money that is mainly controlled by whales from around the world just like crypto markets.

Republican supporters are clearly going all in on these betting platforms to provide Trump an advantage when the reality is that it's still 50-50 between them. Think!

[hedgeh0g]

Your reasoning makes zero sense here. Betting markets can obviously be manipulated to a great extent since it's all just money that is mainly controlled by whales from around the world just like crypto markets.

Republican supporters are clearly going all in on these betting platforms to provide Trump an advantage when the reality is that it's still 50-50 between them. Think!

By the way, this is actually possible. And when the crowd looks at the probabilities on these betting platforms at 60 to 40 and the radio hosts also talk about it, it spreads among everyone and confidence in Trump grows. But it can also affect in other ways, for example, Harris has 40% at the moment and many who were hesitant will decide to support her in order to close the gap. And some, seeing that Trump has 60%, will not want to go and vote for him, because they will think that he is already the winner, but in fact this will not be the case.

In general, your assumption is really interesting, I did not even think about it, but now I will keep it in mind. If this is true, no one will tell us.

[ultrloa]

I have thought about this and I presently consider his argument very uneducated because it can be argued that polls can have personal and political bias. Prediction markets do not have a bias because participants enter this to be right to win the money.

If my argument is correct and if this pump on Trump's ratings on Polymarket continue, it appears that the next president will be a Republican.

Your reasoning makes zero sense here. Betting markets can obviously be manipulated to a great extent since it's all just money that is mainly controlled by whales from around the world just like crypto markets.

Republican supporters are clearly going all in on these betting platforms to provide Trump an advantage when the reality is that it's still 50-50 between them. Think!

We cannot really say at all that political polls always shows bias result. Maybe we just don't like what we see since the candidate people supporting is not leading in that surveys. But if the updated poll result always go in favor to other one which currently Harris get the lead. I think there's facts on statistics they release, that's why it comes up like that. Other Trump supporters just can't accept the poll results. But good thing we could see a not far lead between this two candidate. So we can still assume that this is still 50-50 chance for both Trump and Harris to win.

Lets just see since final result will always comes up after election day. Let see who would take the Presidency this year.

[bitgolden]

If Biden and Kamala did very well under their administration, where the people felt some improvement in their lives, would the American people give Trump another chance? I would be very certain that they will not give him another chance.

If most of US citizens think Biden and Kamala improved their lives last four years, they will vote for Kamala to have 4 more years with administration from Democratic Party.

We will know what the US citizens feel about Biden and Harris administration in the next month.

I have yet another scenario, which will probably be 99% of the reason why people vote. Not many people in the world thinks politicians make your world better, we do not like politicians, hell most of us do not even love the people we vote for, but just think the one against who we vote for is even worse and that's why we vote. So maybe, people do not think Biden made the country better, in fact maybe they think he made it worse, but also they think Trump was even worse?

So they may vote for Kamala, thinking she will make the country worse than it is right now, but also voting for her because they think Trump would make it even worse than Kamala could. They are comparing how terrible things will get and voting based on that? I know this feels like a very sad and upsetting reality, but I honestly believe we are seeing this becoming our reality very quickly, this is why it doesn't really feel like it's a new or unique thing, people vote for bad people to avoid evil people.

Trump seems like a person who is just a horrible horrible human being, and his presidency wasn't awesome neither, but more importantly the way he is a terrible human being plays a big role in not voting for him, Kamala on the other hand, could be a worse president, but that doesn't matter to many, because she is not a horrible human being.