2024 U.S. Presidential Election Bets!

[Don Pedro Dinero]

 In any case Trump went live with a crypto interview and promotion which is also controversial for a candidate to do I think.  To what extent was this a personally connected promotion Im not sure because as a candidate surely he should not be promoting any business for sponsorship in that way but maybe the rules allow it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDhoIKUg_4

According to what I read some time ago, he has a son who is involved in these issues, but if Trump's backing of bitcoin is going to end up pushing a shitcoin, it seems to me that it is going to be more harm than good for us. It reminds me of Musk buying bitcoin and then the price going down when he sold and started pushing Dogecoin.

[bbc.reporter]

Putin wouldnt have answered the question in any sensible way, he would take it as a joke and answered as such.   USA and Russia are as hostile as they've been since the era of the bay of pigs etc.    It was a stupid question and returned with a stupid answer.  Trump says he'll alter the Ukraine war & since Putin has had nothing but pain from that mistake its obvious he would like a change in policy.   I dont doubt he will wait for the outcome of the election to decide the war in some way, its that pivotal most likely.   There is no gain but he wishes to reduce losses surely and loss of face.

I thought the security agents would get paranoid and significantly increase the former president's security

For the money they cant cover every angle.  This time they did their job and stopped it well in advance, he didnt get a shot off.   I wonder if he can even be charged with any attempt but it should not matter as I think filing the serial off a gun is a sentence of more then a decade perhaps, they have enough anyway.

There are speculations that Putin started the war against Ukraine because the western allies are very much close on convincing Ukraine to join NATO. This expansion by NATO is implied as a threat by Putin and Russian generals.

I reckon if Trump becomes the president of America, he might issue an order to stop this expansion and use diplomacy for Russia to stop this war. Putin has mentioned already that there is a possibility that Russia will use nuclear weapons of Ukraine joins NATO during this war. In any case, it appears that Trump will lose the election and this war will certainly continue and increase under the administration of Harris.

[TwitchySeal]

Putin wouldnt have answered the question in any sensible way, he would take it as a joke and answered as such.   USA and Russia are as hostile as they've been since the era of the bay of pigs etc.    It was a stupid question and returned with a stupid answer.  Trump says he'll alter the Ukraine war & since Putin has had nothing but pain from that mistake its obvious he would like a change in policy.   I dont doubt he will wait for the outcome of the election to decide the war in some way, its that pivotal most likely.   There is no gain but he wishes to reduce losses surely and loss of face.

I thought the security agents would get paranoid and significantly increase the former president's security

For the money they cant cover every angle.  This time they did their job and stopped it well in advance, he didnt get a shot off.   I wonder if he can even be charged with any attempt but it should not matter as I think filing the serial off a gun is a sentence of more then a decade perhaps, they have enough anyway.

There are speculations that Putin started the war against Ukraine because the western allies are very much close on convincing Ukraine to join NATO. This expansion by NATO is implied as a threat by Putin and Russian generals.

I reckon if Trump becomes the president of America, he might issue an order to stop this expansion and use diplomacy for Russia to stop this war. Putin has mentioned already that there is a possibility that Russia will use nuclear weapons of Ukraine joins NATO during this war. In any case, it appears that Trump will lose the election and this war will certainly continue and increase under the administration of Harris.

Yeah NATO expansion has been one of the Kremlins talking points from the start.  Then when Sweden and Finland (both share borders with Russia) joined in response to the invasion, Putin acted like no big deal...

And Putting Ukraine, our ally, in the worst possible position by cutting of weapons and then trying to negotiate a plea deal might seem diplomatic, but Ukraine is not the first country Putin attacked for political control, and if he gets Ukraine it won't be the last.
And Trump was already contemplating leaving NATO during his second term until he lost the election (which he is still confused about somehow).  He respects American enemies and disrespects American allies - something about their style of leadership and the way they act like super strong manly men.  I'm sure you've heard his rants about NATO members not paying their bills (which makes only a little bit of sense), it's because he knows they think he's a clown.  

Putin and Xi think he's a clown also I would bet....but a very useful clown.  He seems to be embracing it from his truth social profile picture.  Or maybe he was just getting board with the orange, who knows.

[EarnOnVictor]

That's it, the election would be keenly contested and I think this will be an eye-opener to bigots who think Bitcoin will determine the next US president, how foolish is that? I wonder how many times they mentioned Bitcoin in the debate.

Currently, they are putting too much emphasis on Bitcoin, giving them an irrational view of the political future. Bitcoin cannot directly determine election results. I find intense competition and political maneuvering in elections much more difficult.

I know many factors play into election results, such as economic conditions, social issues, and the candidates' power and political standing. Bitcoin may have an effect but will not act as the sole cause.

The way they talked about Bitcoin in the Bitcoin 2024 debate is shocking. Their contention suggests that Bitcoin is a higher priority in their campaign. There won't be any hype about Bitcoin, it will stop after the election.

I must applaud your wisdom here, you are another person who sees the situation rightly, there are too many pressing issues than to emphasize Bitcoin in the US election. It amazes me how some people (mostly here) think/talk like a child, and at times, it got me thinking whether they want people to read what they want them to believe of them about Bitcoin or they are just so senseless because of their disposition about Bitcoin and the US election because it's just gross believing Bitcoin is the decider of the US election, what a heck!!!

The US is the most followed election in the world and its place/responsibility is beyond the US itself but the entire world. Now tell me, when Bitcoin is nothing to a lesser country, how much will it determine the election of a big country like the US which the Yankees and the world at large watch out for for security, stability etc? If the US fails today, many things will fail in the world, are they telling me that Bitcoin will now determine its next president? Bitcoin is not even 0.01% of the determining factor, no wonder Harris beat Trump in the debate, that's someone who didn't put the crypto mantra on her head.

[bitgolden]

Looking at the polls and the social media, not a lot of republicans care about this second "attempt", one of the main reasons is that it was nowhere near Trump, it was "shooting around where he was" so he wasn't even directly shot at, no bullets were even vicinity of where trump was, so it wasn't really an "attempt" as it was a scare tactic at the very best case.

On the other hand, democrats are literally saying it was something Trump himself organized after realizing that he is losing places as republican as even north Carolina, the polls are showing that there is a possibility of 320+ EC votes for Kamala if all goes to her as polls show, there is a possibility, and even if she doesn't get all, she is leading more than margin of error right now, so Trump organized this to make sure he gets some votes back and gets some republicans rallied behind him.

Obviously it's something we can expect him to do, not saying he did it, but those horrible corrupt people around him could have arranged something like this and wouldn't surprise me.

[GigaBit]

Yesterday Trump was live for his first interview post the arrest of a hostile with a gun near his golf game.  I wont call it an actual attempt as the potential shooter never got close from the details Ive heard.
  In any case Trump went live with a crypto interview and promotion which is also controversial for a candidate to do I think.  To what extent was this a personally connected promotion Im not sure because as a candidate surely he should not be promoting any business for sponsorship in that way but maybe the rules allow it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDhoIKUg_4

What I think is that a celebrity or a political figure will never take Bitcoin to the heights it is until they truly understand what Bitcoin is all about. He may be doing these things by focusing on the crypto community through his son. If that happens, we may see some positives for the time being, but in the long run we will see more losses than gains. Already @Don Pedro Dinero mention about musk condition. Musk is a businessman who briefly showed interest in Bitcoin as well as plans for his Dogecoin, but that is no more. I think it's better to keep crypto independent. After the election process, a clearer idea will be obtained from these issues.

[sompitonov]

Yesterday Trump was live for his first interview post the arrest of a hostile with a gun near his golf game.  I wont call it an actual attempt as the potential shooter never got close from the details Ive heard.
  In any case Trump went live with a crypto interview and promotion which is also controversial for a candidate to do I think.  To what extent was this a personally connected promotion Im not sure because as a candidate surely he should not be promoting any business for sponsorship in that way but maybe the rules allow it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDhoIKUg_4

What I think is that a celebrity or a political figure will never take Bitcoin to the heights it is until they truly understand what Bitcoin is all about. He may be doing these things by focusing on the crypto community through his son. If that happens, we may see some positives for the time being, but in the long run we will see more losses than gains. Already @Don Pedro Dinero mention about musk condition. Musk is a businessman who briefly showed interest in Bitcoin as well as plans for his Dogecoin, but that is no more. I think it's better to keep crypto independent. After the election process, a clearer idea will be obtained from these issues.

The thing is that after the elections, the already victorious candidate does not need to present himself as someone who is loyal to something in order to collect more votes. After the elections, I will not be surprised at all if the positive rhetoric and conversations turn in the other direction and the regulator's actions become tougher. Moreover, I think that this is what will happen. Therefore, I am absolutely not flying in the sky and am not happy about the promises that presidential candidates are making now, although I notice how many are so happy with today's positive rhetoric that they simply lose their heads. I advise such people to come down to earth and evaluate everything soberly.

[Sithara007]

The thing is that after the elections, the already victorious candidate does not need to present himself as someone who is loyal to something in order to collect more votes. After the elections, I will not be surprised at all if the positive rhetoric and conversations turn in the other direction and the regulator's actions become tougher. Moreover, I think that this is what will happen. Therefore, I am absolutely not flying in the sky and am not happy about the promises that presidential candidates are making now, although I notice how many are so happy with today's positive rhetoric that they simply lose their heads. I advise such people to come down to earth and evaluate everything soberly.

Trump is already accusing Kamala of copying his policies. But then, he also claims that she is doing all that just to get the centrist vote. If she gets elected, then she will refuse to acknowledge any of these promises. And when it comes to Bitcoin, trust me Kamala is going to be 100 times worse than Biden. The latter was at least nominally "moderate". But Kamala is a well known Communist, who follows the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology. Wealth redistribution is one of her priorities, and ownership of cryptocurrency goes against that policy.

[alani123]

The thing is that after the elections, the already victorious candidate does not need to present himself as someone who is loyal to something in order to collect more votes. After the elections, I will not be surprised at all if the positive rhetoric and conversations turn in the other direction and the regulator's actions become tougher. Moreover, I think that this is what will happen. Therefore, I am absolutely not flying in the sky and am not happy about the promises that presidential candidates are making now, although I notice how many are so happy with today's positive rhetoric that they simply lose their heads. I advise such people to come down to earth and evaluate everything soberly.

Trump is already accusing Kamala of copying his policies. But then, he also claims that she is doing all that just to get the centrist vote. If she gets elected, then she will refuse to acknowledge any of these promises. And when it comes to Bitcoin, trust me Kamala is going to be 100 times worse than Biden. The latter was at least nominally "moderate". But Kamala is a well known Communist, who follows the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology. Wealth redistribution is one of her priorities, and ownership of cryptocurrency goes against that policy.

What policies were there for Kamala to copy?
She already had 4 years as vice president to copy the good parts, she didn't need to do that in the campaign trail...

Biden's administration did indeed keep and strengthen certain policies, but they're very few. I can think of tariffs for instance, Biden introduced even more tariffs.
But really there's few similarities. For most policies Kamala has Trump comes out and calls her a communist, which is quite the insult to real communists.

US politics has become very unhinged and nonsensical thanks to Trump.  
Unless Trump brings some common sense politics to beat Kamala with the popular vote I think at this point he doesn't have much hope for a shot to the presidency.

[JoyMarsha]

That's it, the election would be keenly contested and I think this will be an eye-opener to bigots who think Bitcoin will determine the next US president, how foolish is that? I wonder how many times they mentioned Bitcoin in the debate.

Currently, they are putting too much emphasis on Bitcoin, giving them an irrational view of the political future. Bitcoin cannot directly determine election results. I find intense competition and political maneuvering in elections much more difficult.

I know many factors play into election results, such as economic conditions, social issues, and the candidates' power and political standing. Bitcoin may have an effect but will not act as the sole cause.

The way they talked about Bitcoin in the Bitcoin 2024 debate is shocking. Their contention suggests that Bitcoin is a higher priority in their campaign. There won't be any hype about Bitcoin, it will stop after the election.

I must applaud your wisdom here, you are another person who sees the situation rightly, there are too many pressing issues than to emphasize Bitcoin in the US election. It amazes me how some people (mostly here) think/talk like a child, and at times, it got me thinking whether they want people to read what they want them to believe of them about Bitcoin or they are just so senseless because of their disposition about Bitcoin and the US election because it's just gross believing Bitcoin is the decider of the US election, what a heck!!!

The US is the most followed election in the world and its place/responsibility is beyond the US itself but the entire world. Now tell me, when Bitcoin is nothing to a lesser country, how much will it determine the election of a big country like the US which the Yankees and the world at large watch out for for security, stability etc? If the US fails today, many things will fail in the world, are they telling me that Bitcoin will now determine its next president? Bitcoin is not even 0.01% of the determining factor, no wonder Harris beat Trump in the debate, that's someone who didn't put the crypto mantra on her head.

Never will Bitcoin be a deciding factor America will use to vote for their next president by November. If Trump or Harris likes, let them use Bitcoin as their campaign strategy to get the minds of crypto believers; America knows who's worth voting for, and that will take their country to the height it has always been. There are many other pressing issues waiting for the next president of America to address, far different from  Bitcoin.

[Sithara007]

Unless Trump brings some common sense politics to beat Kamala with the popular vote I think at this point he doesn't have much hope for a shot to the presidency.

LOL.. seriously? Check this:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/maps/president/2024/no-toss-up/electoral-college

According to Democrat leaning pollster RCP, Trump is favored to win the electoral college, although Kamala may win the popular vote. We still have more than one and half months to go for the elections. And the more Kamala campaigns among the independent voters, the more of these voters will desert her. Kamala is boosted by the mainstream media and establishment mainly. But this effect is not a permanent one. The impact will wean off after some time, and then she is going to struggle against Trump.

[alani123]

Unless Trump brings some common sense politics to beat Kamala with the popular vote I think at this point he doesn't have much hope for a shot to the presidency.

LOL.. seriously? Check this:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/maps/president/2024/no-toss-up/electoral-college

According to Democrat leaning pollster RCP, Trump is favored to win the electoral college, although Kamala may win the popular vote. We still have more than one and half months to go for the elections. And the more Kamala campaigns among the independent voters, the more of these voters will desert her. Kamala is boosted by the mainstream media and establishment mainly. But this effect is not a permanent one. The impact will wean off after some time, and then she is going to struggle against Trump.

Things are not as easy for Trump. The trend is that he keeps performing worse in national polls, but even in terms of the electoral map, things ain't easy.

Trump must win on several battleground states to secure his re-election.

Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are going to be the most impaction. As per latest polls, Trump is only slightly ahead in Georgia and Arizona. Maybe North Carolina as well if we're generous.
The issue here is that Trump would need to win at least one more of the above and Harris seems to be performing better in the Northern states for some reason.

Will Trump manage to get people more in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan on his side? Hopefully, but it's going to be hard based on current trends.

[Haunebu]

Kamala is boosted by the mainstream media and establishment mainly. But this effect is not a permanent one. The impact will wean off after some time, and then she is going to struggle against Trump.

Whatever floats your boat. You talk like you exactly know what's going to happen in the future which is why your reasoning is just silly.

Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are going to be the most impaction. As per latest polls, Trump is only slightly ahead in Georgia and Arizona. Maybe North Carolina as well if we're generous.
The issue here is that Trump would need to win at least one more of the above and Harris seems to be performing better in the Northern states for some reason.

Will Trump manage to get people more in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan on his side? Hopefully, but it's going to be hard based on current trends.

These polls aren't always accurate though most people including me feel that Harris will end up winning now regardless of whatever happens in the remaining weeks. Feels like Biden 2.0 vs Trump -1.0.

[TwitchySeal]

According to Democrat leaning pollster RCP

You may be the first person to ever call RCP "democratic leaning".  They don't have a crazy bias, but they def lean right if anything, and the owners are def MAGA.

RealClear Investors and Crest Media is the owner of RealClearPolitics. John McIntyre is the Co-founder & CEO, Tom Bevan is the Co-founder & Publisher, and Erin Waters is the President of the RealClear Media Group. According to Political Wire, RealClear operated a far-right website by the name Conservative Country; while this website is no longer in existence, the associated Facebook Page has 800,000+ followers. The Facebook Page publishes pro-Trump, anti-immigrant, Islamophobic, far-right memes and information, many of which link back to RealClear properties.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/real-clear-politics/


 And they aren't a pollster either.  Pollsters conduct polls.  RCP aggregates many different polls.

[Hispo]

Never will Bitcoin be a deciding factor America will use to vote for their next president by November. If Trump or Harris likes, let them use Bitcoin as their campaign strategy to get the minds of crypto believers; America knows who's worth voting for, and that will take their country to the height it has always been. There are many other pressing issues waiting for the next president of America to address, far different from  Bitcoin.

I think st this point of time, the average person living in the United States does not see Bitcoin and the implementation or adoption of Blockchain technology as a driving factor for them to vote for either Kamala Harris or Donald, I have seen in the polls the most important driving factor among voters are: the state of the economy, the rights of women over their own body, cultural wars, etc. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is neglectable in the eyes of the establishment and big donors.
The only reason Trump is bringing Bitcoin and cryptocurrency onto the table is because he knows this is going to be a very close race and he may need a little push from those within the Bitcoin mining community who are aware of Kamala imposing ridiculously high taxes on them.

[3kpk3]

I think st this point of time, the average person living in the United States does not see Bitcoin and the implementation or adoption of Blockchain technology as a driving factor for them to vote for either Kamala Harris or Donald, I have seen in the polls the most important driving factor among voters are: the state of the economy, the rights of women over their own body, cultural wars, etc. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is neglectable in the eyes of the establishment and big donors.
The only reason Trump is bringing Bitcoin and cryptocurrency onto the table is because he knows this is going to be a very close race and he may need a little push from those within the Bitcoin mining community who are aware of Kamala imposing ridiculously high taxes on them.

This has actually been the case at any point of time if you ask me. Hardcore Trump + Crypto fans are the only people who actually thought that he would help crypto rise to a new level in a gullible manner.

Cannot wait for the elections to end so that the never ending 'Trump supporting BTC' threads would cease within this forum.

[MarjorieZimmermanGinger]

Let's have a thread to discuss gambling on the 2024 United States Presidential election!
Remember: This is a thread about gambling, we go by the official results. For disputing past events you can go on the politics board.

Interestingly, we're seeing a woman nominee have a real shot at the presidency, something that doesn't seem to have kept being brought up as much as it was in 2016.

But somehow I am more convinced that Trump will lead after Biden resigns, the narrative may be different because Trump also led in his time so he has the ability to win again. Although his arrogance is a problem for some who do not support him or those who are pro him.

I am not a supporter of either of them because this is not the leader of my country but the digital footprint that we read in several sources says that Trump's chances of leading are still quite large. Even Kamala also has the potential to win the election if her team is solid in moving to control voters in several districts.

After Biden dropping out, Democrats seem to be performing much better with Kamala. After the debate, polls show her have a steady lead and the odds on bookies seem to agree.

I have no expertise in this matter because I do not know either candidate and even if I use the analysis available in various sources on the internet, I will not find a definite answer. Maybe after Biden resigns, Kamala will be much more superior because the base will move to her, but fighting Trump requires a lot of strategy.

[sompitonov]

The thing is that after the elections, the already victorious candidate does not need to present himself as someone who is loyal to something in order to collect more votes. After the elections, I will not be surprised at all if the positive rhetoric and conversations turn in the other direction and the regulator's actions become tougher. Moreover, I think that this is what will happen. Therefore, I am absolutely not flying in the sky and am not happy about the promises that presidential candidates are making now, although I notice how many are so happy with today's positive rhetoric that they simply lose their heads. I advise such people to come down to earth and evaluate everything soberly.

Trump is already accusing Kamala of copying his policies. But then, he also claims that she is doing all that just to get the centrist vote. If she gets elected, then she will refuse to acknowledge any of these promises. And when it comes to Bitcoin, trust me Kamala is going to be 100 times worse than Biden. The latter was at least nominally "moderate". But Kamala is a well known Communist, who follows the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology. Wealth redistribution is one of her priorities, and ownership of cryptocurrency goes against that policy.

Yes, it may be as you say, in which case many who own cryptocurrency are not ready to vote for it. But I know that a large percentage of the American population owns cryptocurrency, because many communicate and tell each other about its advantages over traditional finance. If Kamala bans it, she will create a whole crowd of those who will hate it. But Trump is showing his rabid loyalty to crypto, for example, today he paid with crypto in a bar in New York. This is the first transaction of a presidential candidate in the Bitcoin network. Honestly, I did not think that it would happen so quickly.

[TwitchySeal]

But Kamala is a well known Communist, who follows the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology. Wealth redistribution is one of her priorities, and ownership of cryptocurrency goes against that policy.

Kamala is only a well known Communist among those who are ignorant when it comes to the idea of Communism.

To say Kamala is communist because she thinks people that make more money should pay more taxes than people that make less money would mean America has been a communist country for over 100 years.  Trumps tax bill would be communist, which would make Trump a communist.  Obama would be communist. Bush would be a communist.  Every modern president would be communist.  Modi would be a communist.  Canada would be communist.  The UK would be communist.  You get the picture.

This is a good example of why Trump loves the poorly educated.  You're easier to fool.

[Sithara007]

Yes, it may be as you say, in which case many who own cryptocurrency are not ready to vote for it. But I know that a large percentage of the American population owns cryptocurrency, because many communicate and tell each other about its advantages over traditional finance. If Kamala bans it, she will create a whole crowd of those who will hate it. But Trump is showing his rabid loyalty to crypto, for example, today he paid with crypto in a bar in New York. This is the first transaction of a presidential candidate in the Bitcoin network. Honestly, I did not think that it would happen so quickly.

There is a lot of difference between someone who supports cryptocurrency and someone who owns it. I own several stocks and mutual funds, but that doesn't mean that I really support these corporations and banks. At the most there maybe 100,000 or so serious cryptocurrency supporters around the world, and out of that one-third or so maybe in the US. And number of crypto investors maybe in the millions. And a few tens of thousands of crypto supporters doesn't really decide the outcome of the POTUS elections.