|
I now have 13k shares of Rick Scott for VP He's flying to NYC to meet Trump on Monday, VP shortlist obviously
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:24 |
|
|
Arkane posted:I now have 13k shares of Rick Scott for VP The Hell Ticket.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
If anyone is feeling the jones real bad for instant gratification (seriously, get help in that case), Presidential Gallup Approval is basically a 50/50 coin flip that'll resolve in about 3-4 hours. No is cheaper, but is equally likely to win out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:lol @ hillary.nom and dem.brokered being only $.03 apart dem.brokered no is free money right? with only two candidates it cannot mathematically be a brokered convention (so the yes bet is really betting on something insane happening like Biden getting in late)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
schwein11 posted:dem.brokered no is free money right? with only two candidates it cannot mathematically be a brokered convention (so the yes bet is really betting on something insane happening like Biden getting in late) Two plausible scenarios: - Bernie & Hillary get a tie, somehow. The odds of this are so slim it's not even worth considering. - Hillary dies or returns to Mars because her people need her or w/e. This leads to a split vote between multiple candidates which also won't happen because all the delegates will just go to Bernie. So yeah it's free money. If you read the comments you'll see why it's so low. All the people on 'Yes' are misunderstanding what contested means and think they have a shot. You should have no qualms about taking their pennies. YES wouldn't be a good buy even if it were at .01 Necc0 has issued a correction as of 16:28 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I now have 13k shares of Rick Scott for VP The most insane ticket. Since it guarantees Florida for Hillary I can only assume that should it come to pass, Trump really is the deepest cover Hillary operative ever. Or he actually, truly believes that California and New York are in play, which makes him even dumber than Louie Gohmert.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
FiveThirtyEight has a piece of saying they'd take Bernie Sanders at the 6-to-1 odds their poll model offers. Then Nate Silver spends several hundred words talking about how this will probably all hinge on Hispanic voters, but no one quite knows how the Hispanic voters will break, and also it'll probably all hinge Asian-American voters as well. Hillary CA YES is still in the high 60s. I can't imagine anything changing that from now until election day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
FYI latest poll has crosstabs showing Sanders leading by 5 among "already voted" respondents, which is a pretty big departure from other surveys. Survey also shows Sanders leading 55-35 among Asian voters and the Latino vote tied. I'm nervous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
that flies against everything we've heard before everything what poll?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:that flies against everything we've heard before USC/LA Times poll. Toplines show a solid lead for Clinton among likely voters, to be clear.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:FYI latest poll has crosstabs showing Sanders leading by 5 among "already voted" respondents, which is a pretty big departure from other surveys. Survey also shows Sanders leading 55-35 among Asian voters and the Latino vote tied. Great news for me! Also just play on that information. Buy a bunch of Bernie YES now and when the early voting results come in, flip them and invest in Clinton YES. Then flip those. etc... Ride the rollercoaster my friend 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:FYI latest poll has crosstabs showing Sanders leading by 5 among "already voted" respondents, which is a pretty big departure from other surveys. Survey also shows Sanders leading 55-35 among Asian voters and the Latino vote tied. Yea, the slow death of the Oregon MOV disaster has me anxious here. I mean, California is about as must-win for Clinton as you can get considering she's basically clinched the nomination. Presumably she'll do like she did in Kentucky and push to make sure she pulls through. But I don't know if my heart can handle things being as tight as they were in Kentucky, though. The Joe Man posted:Great news for me! Also just play on that information. Buy a bunch of Bernie YES now and when the early voting results come in, flip them and invest in Clinton YES. Then flip those. etc... Sadly, when you're maxed out at about 4 cents a share more than the current high price on those swings, that option is a lot less viable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not happy with the prices I bought in at now but hey ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ that's predictit
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
Source: Reid promoting Warren for VP http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/elizabeth-warren-harry-reid-vice-president-223892 I'm going to make $1,500.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
Rumors and speculation; no thanks! Edit: changed my mind; took a small position OlSpazzy has issued a correction as of 03:53 on Jun 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
I cashed most of my roll out a while ago but if it ends up being scott I'll be back over $500 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
CBS/YouGov out with a CA poll: 49 Clinton, 47 Sanders. I'm feeling pretty good about my Hill Yes shares. The MoV is going to be exciting. Once again, looks like PI put it right on the money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
watwat posted:CBS/YouGov out with a CA poll: 49 Clinton, 47 Sanders. It's funny, the first two Hillary +2 polls drove the Hillary YES shares down in price for over a week, but now a new Hillary +2 polls are causing her price to rise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
After a certain point, doesn't the "he always outperforms the polls!" line become untenable? That's a lot of polls showing her with a lead, even if the lead is narrow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:After a certain point, doesn't the "he always outperforms the polls!" line become untenable? That's a lot of polls showing her with a lead, even if the lead is narrow. I love that it is apparently now a contest to see if Latinos or The Youth are more underrepresented in polling. Whichever is the most underrepresented gives their candidate the win! The polls can't just be right or wrong, they've got to have a hidden vector that really means anything can happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Hillary landslide in VI and Puerto Rico is going strong for her as well. edit: Oh wait they don't have a market for either? wtf edit2: CA market is responding to these results. Almost returned to our old price from two weeks ago. Necc0 has issued a correction as of 22:45 on Jun 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
If the California market pushes any higher I'll probably dump my Bernie No shares for a bit of profit and shuffle off like a coward. (Then lose it all trying to play the wild swings on Tuesday.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Gyges posted:I love that it is apparently now a contest to see if Latinos or The Youth are more underrepresented in polling. Whichever is the most underrepresented gives their candidate the win! The polls can't just be right or wrong, they've got to have a hidden vector that really means anything can happen. Arguing about data is still a lot better than the Oregon shitshow, where there was basically no data at all and everyone was just pulling numbers out of their rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
The Tyler Pedigo predictions came out, but nothing too crazy different and he predicts Hillary to win California too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
He has Bernie winning New Mexico, which has caused movement in the NM market. He's also an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:He has Bernie winning New Mexico, which has caused movement in the NM market. He's also an idiot. Lol come on, he's a one ex-con team and he's predicting better than I would.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:He has Bernie winning New Mexico, which has caused movement in the NM market. He's also an idiot. yes, but pre-oregon PI moved dramatically on his word. it was really, really bizarre. haven't seen his name mentioned much since.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:He has Bernie winning New Mexico, which has caused movement in the NM market. He's also an idiot. I wouldn't be shocked if Bernie won New Mexico. It's a really weird place with a lot of hippies. Also, Hillary doesn't have latinos on lock like she does with black voters. But it's a closed primary so Hillary will probably actually win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:yes, but pre-oregon PI moved dramatically on his word. it was really, really bizarre. haven't seen his name mentioned much since. Bernie by 40 in Oregon was when he jumped the shark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
haha:Tyler Pedigo posted:I believe that the margin of victory in New Jersey will be anywhere from 5-20%.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 11:36
|
|
|
California Democratic primary "exit" poll of people who have voted by mail: https://public.tableau.com/profile/paulmitche11#!/vizhome/CapitolWeeklyDemPresidentialPrimaryAVExitPoll/USDEMPRIM in 2014, only 30% of the votes were cast on election day, the rest were votes by mail
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Baconomics posted:California Democratic primary "exit" poll of people who have voted by mail: Hrm... Latinos are actually slightly favoring Sanders, but Hillary is winning Asian-Americans by a whopping 16 points. I imagine we'll see a lot more day-of voting this time around than in 2014, so I'm not sure how strongly to take these figures right now. Correct me if I'm wrong, though, but this does look pretty good for Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
New market: Will Rubio run for Senate in 2016?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
The argument for more mail-in votes is that more people know about mail-in voting now and appreciate the convenience. I'm not sure exactly the argument for more in-person voters. Lots of new voters who aren't aware that they could mail it in? Either way, even if it's 50% mail-in, that means Bernie needs 56% of in-person votes tomorrow and that seems like a lot in light of the polling showing him trailing by two. If it's 60% mail-in? Bernie needs 61% of the in-person vote tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:The argument for more mail-in votes is that more people know about mail-in voting now and appreciate the convenience. I'm not sure exactly the argument for more in-person voters. Lots of new voters who aren't aware that they could mail it in? Depending on how it's implemented, mail voting can disenfranchise several groups of people. For example, take a hypothetical state that started out having local precinct voting and same-day registration (where you can show up to the precinct and change your registration right there before you vote), which moved to all-mail voting. This change would mean that people have a much higher barrier to getting their registration in order, because that now involves going to the county courthouse or DMV instead of walking three blocks to the basement of First Methodist Church. Now think about the people for whom this would represent the greatest barrier, and you have people who move around often, or who work three jobs, or who don't have a car. So, poor people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Vote by mail enfranchises way more people than it disenfranchises, and the turnout rates speak to that. Someone with three jobs would definitely prefer a vote by mail system over an 8-hour timeslot, it's really not even a close question.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
on the subject of voting methods, New Mexico's system causes chaotic election night reporting that makes it very difficult to accurately extrapolate the final margin so be advised if you're playing NM-DEM or NM-DEM-MoV explanation from a political junkie I know in New Mexico: quote:I wouldn't bet on it. It's essentially early voting on election day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
what in the gently caress kind of system is that? yea, avoiding that
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Baconomics posted:on the subject of voting methods, New Mexico's system causes chaotic election night reporting that makes it very difficult to accurately extrapolate the final margin so be advised if you're playing NM-DEM or NM-DEM-MoV Jesus, dudes. Just don't report by precinct but rather county. Gonna be so many fraud accusations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:24 |
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Vote by mail enfranchises way more people than it disenfranchises, and the turnout rates speak to that. Someone with three jobs would definitely prefer a vote by mail system over an 8-hour timeslot, it's really not even a close question. This is becoming a derail, but....you're wrong. I'm sorry, but I'm a Minnesotan and I cannot stand idly by as someone claims that their lovely pet system disenfranchises fewer people than our gold-star system of same-day precinct registration and no-reason-required absentee mail voting. We have the best system in the country, and the numbers, if you actually look at them, speak to that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 03:21
|
|