|
I got rocked. drat!
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 06:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
I am down three dollars after throwing money all over the board. I was so confident in Religious Liberty. It was so close.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
I'm still mostly amazed 'Clinton Foundation' hit but not 'Trump Foundation' honestly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Social Studies 3rd Period posted:I'm still mostly amazed 'Clinton Foundation' hit but not 'Trump Foundation' honestly. Kaine specifically mentioned the Trump Foundation during the debate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Kaine specifically mentioned the Trump Foundation during the debate. Correct. But had to be the moderator for those markets to hit. Mod mentioned Clinton Foundation, but not the Trump Foundation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
The no's on this next debate seem even more likely. I dunno if I'm up for more "all the no's" strategy!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
The Trump Pants on Fire market is clearly still traumatized by what happened last month. 3 days out (with 2 of them being Saturday and Sunday where I doubt anything will happen) and B5 is still trading under 80. https://www.predictit.org/Market/2427/How-many-totally-false-statements-will-Trump-make-in-September
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:The Trump Pants on Fire market is clearly still traumatized by what happened last month. 3 days out (with 2 of them being Saturday and Sunday where I doubt anything will happen) and B5 is still trading under 80. lol if you take this bet
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:lol if you take this bet I've got $20 on it. See if I can turn it into $25
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
"She's been fighting ISIS her entire adult life" and claiming a public figure has a sex tape when she doesn't. I wouldn't touch "3 or fewer" til 11:55pm on the final day, and even then maybe not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
It looks like the Nobel Peace Prize market broke PI. I guess they've never had a market resolve all NO before? A very contentious Gallup market closes in less than an hour. I wonder what they'll do if no one can trade before the results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Raivin posted:"She's been fighting ISIS her entire adult life" and claiming a public figure has a sex tape when she doesn't. I wouldn't touch "3 or fewer" til 11:55pm on the final day, and even then maybe not. I'm selling if it spikes to 95 but "fighting ISIS her entire adult life" is so absurd and was more a misspeak by a guy who was flustered at a debate. Sex tape is ambiguous enough that I don't think it rises to POF. There isn't a sex tape but there is footage of her probably having sex at night under covers on that Spanish big brother knockoff. Enough for it to be rated "mostly false" but not POF. Not betting the farm but I like my chances in the 75-80 range. Raivin posted:It looks like the Nobel Peace Prize market broke PI. I guess they've never had a market resolve all NO before? So that's what happened? Last year they had a none of the above. I was going to pick that one but couldn't find it. Dumb oversight on their part Zeta Taskforce has issued a correction as of 16:13 on Oct 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Raivin posted:It looks like the Nobel Peace Prize market broke PI. I guess they've never had a market resolve all NO before? Didn't the $10 bill market resolve all-no?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Didn't the $10 bill market resolve all-no? Maybe, not sure. Before the site went down fully, the Maintenance message blamed their closing of the Nobel market affecting other things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:So that's what happened? Last year they had a none of the above. I was going to pick that one but couldn't find it. Dumb oversight on their part They also had a "Multiple of these" contract which would resolve Yes if there were multiple winners spanning two or more of the existing contracts. Really weird. I made some nice money neg-risking the whole lot of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Didn't the $10 bill market resolve all-no? Isnt that still kicking around with all of them trading at 2 cents?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
I had a bunch of 97-98c no's in that market before the site went down and we all lost all our money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
trap sprung, all the nerd money stolen right before the election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
FYI site is back up. You have a little time to cancel any orders you need to before trading begins proper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Holy moly looks like Trump's 'Carpe Vulvae' comment is causing the biggest swing I've ever seen in the USPREZ market
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
I'm already maxed on a lot of the "who will be prez markets," but I threw some more into "Will a woman be the next POTUS"? Also threw a small bit of lottery money at Georgia, ME-02, and some money at Ohio, though I don't think the last one is a lottery ticket really.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
BoA offered me a $150 credit if I spent $500 on the BoA credit card I never use. So obviously I bought back in for $500. Looks like I chose a good time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
What markets are you in now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
Fidel Castronaut posted:What markets are you in now? Just scooping up a limited selection of the debate noes at this point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
I think you have to look at today's events as a turning point but which way it goes drastically changes your strategy: a) If you think the media will continue to hammer Trump with more and more of these gaffes from years ago, then the sky's the limit when it comes to Hillary's EV count. Some good but risky picks for Democratic wins are probably Iowa, Ohio, and NE-02. I do not think that North Carolina at 75 is a very good pick. b) If you think the media will encourage a horse race narrative, then this is the time to buy Republican states at low prices. This is what I think will happen and since I was able to sell Virginia.DEM.YES at 90c, I picked up some Arizona, Georgia, Texas, and Utah shares for Republicans to win.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
I want to say that Trump has pushed things even too far for our bottom-feeding media but they've never failed to disappoint me before so idk.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I want to say that Trump has pushed things even too far for our bottom-feeding media but they've never failed to disappoint me before so idk. To look at it objectively, these are the same things he has been saying all election cycle, his entire life really. The only difference is that this time, he apologized.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
This isn't the thread to debate Trump but he has never said "grab them by the pussy" before. He's been misogynistic but this is proof that is impossible to refute. This is going to move the needle, though probably not 1984 levels.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
The only questions that matter are a) if the media thinks staying on the attack will help ratings or not and; b) if there are enough voters in swing states (or lean republican states) who didn't care before and will care now enough to swing their vote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
Utah Congressman went on multiple networks to say he can't vote for Trump. There's a good chance that we will see a considerable increase in lean-right voters staying home and the major networks are going to milk this for a while, asking every republican they can get on the air if they still endorse Trump. Then there will inevitably be more poo poo released. We aren't in Alabama going blue territory but the map is not where it was a few weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Which states do you disagree with me up there? Utah?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
I don't think Ohio and Iowa are a lock but I think "risky" is an exaggeration.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:The only questions that matter are a) if the media thinks staying on the attack will help ratings or not and; b) if there are enough voters in swing states (or lean republican states) who didn't care before and will care now enough to swing their vote. From what it sounds like camp Hillary is just getting started so they'll probably be able to keep the news fed with the freshest scandals all month. What's uncertain is I can't think of another election that melted down like this to use as a reference so actually betting on outcomes becomes pretty difficult. It's obvious that Trump's campaign is over but I'm totally clueless if he's gonna do slightly worse than Romney or get Mondale'd.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
Any thoughts on the supreme court markets w/ the Trump implosion? If the thinking is that the Senate will bring Garland's appointment to vote after a Clinton win, then it's a decent bet at a good price compared to the POTUS markets. But McConell et al have said otherwise, stating no vote at all. But I wonder how much of that from Senate Republicans is pre-election talk
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
I think they're full of poo poo and will vote on him, but I'm not willing to back that up with cash. I want to know how the post-debate WUSL poll will go. Like I'm almost positive Clinton will give a better performance, but it is Missouri.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Lol. 370.REPPREZ16 is still at 8 cents, again proving that PredictIt can't really be used as a measure of probability. Only small-change suckers like me want their money tied up for months at a time. Bet you're feeling pretty good now. Even if it doesn't close at "YES", you bought those at the exact right time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
So does anyone else think Trump mentioning "Broaddrick" the lock of the century?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
huge pile of hamburger posted:So does anyone else think Trump mentioning "Broaddrick" the lock of the century? I actually am considering getting on the other side of that. There's a fairly strong chance that Trump talks about it in generalities rather than uses specific names.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:I actually am considering getting on the other side of that. There's a fairly strong chance that Trump talks about it in generalities rather than uses specific names. He's already RTed about her specifically, he can't dodge it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:He's already RTed about her specifically, he can't dodge it. It's not about dodging it, it's just that he's not a person who ever talks specifics at all, especially when under pressure. It would not be out of character for him to avoid using the exact word in favor of a broader attack on Hillary "enabling" Bill's abuse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 20:36
|
|