|
Vox Nihili posted:I've got a bunch of No shares on this one, not sure if I should sell or hold at this point. Looks like the price will keep going up, but I don't want to be caught unaware if Biden actually pulls the trigger, which is still possible. I'll say that there is a rumor going around that Biden's committee has begun recruiting finance staff and will make a surprise announcement next week. The Draft Biden SuperPAC has also somehow come into a large amount of money and is now staffing up in the four early voting states.
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 7, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
Necc0 posted:Would also like to know this. I got my No shares for pretty cheap and can still dump them at a profit. I still don't think he's going to run but if those rumors are credible I don't think it's worth the risk. The SuperPAC stuff is public record. JobsthatareLEFT, a Dem staff job board, had them up (under the header "National Presidential Political Organization" or something to that effect, but the from line was connected with a Draft Biden employee). The finance stuff I heard about a week ago from a Dem staffer not connected with the Biden people. Their friend was approached about it. I've also heard from another source in Dem politics as well that folks have been approached about joining Biden staff. Again, just rumors. Nothing I can personally attest to, but I personally place credence in it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:That's insider trading. I don't think so.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:I knew the Draft Joe people have been hiring, so that's not too surprising. I guess the question is whether any of these positions are directly connected with Biden, rather than the Biden PACs and other boosters. Yeah, I mean it's a game of telephone at some point with these things. The announcement date (which was told to me as one week after labor day) was pretty specific though. Could have been speculation passed on as fact, though. Still, there's a lot of smoke and a lot of things coming together at once. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 14:39 on Sep 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
I don't really have credibility on this after my last rumor did not pan out (re: specific date), but I still invested very heavily in Biden after several of my friends were contacted to work on his campaign (not draft Biden). I heard from multiple people about one particular prominent pick to run their organizing program that also ran the field program for Obama in a significant battleground state in 2012. Which doesn't 100% mean that he will run, but this combined with the recent strategy email from Kaufman, the relative radio silence, and the continuing delay make me think an announcement will happen and it will happen soon. In particular: at this juncture, there is no reason to wait unless you are announcing. The right day to say "no" is today, because holding off is a distraction on your ability to live your life and do your job. The right day to say yes is whenever your team deems is most strategic to do so, which can be any time in the next couple weeks. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 19:28 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
I guess I disagree on that. I think his path to the nomination is plausible, even if it's not exactly easy. He's always been an effective campaigner, but he's always lacked two essential things: money and stature. Being a sitting VP gives him both of those.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:Right. This is finally the realization I came to. He could still run, but with the debate done with, I believe his window of opportunity to achieve success has closed and each passing day only serves to make a campaign victory that much harder. Right now he's gotta be realizing that his desire to run (which he surely has) is being trumped by the realities of the political landscape. It would be unprecedented in modern politics for someone to run and win with this late of an entry, but I would say he is the only possible person that COULD jump in at this stage and win. I think he could effectively compete by raising $20m or so between now and Feb 1 which is more than do-able. He doesn't need to raise more money than Hillary or Bernie to win. The path is not as easy as Clinton's, but once he goes in I would expect a polling bump that would make him to be far more competitive than he currently is. I think it's a very plausible path to the nomination.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:I totally get where you're coming from and shared the same view up until this last Tuesday. Had Clinton performed poorly during the debate, I'd still be leaning towards that view, but she was pretty commanding and has effectively boxed Biden out. I think the final go-no go decision was made prior to the debate, probably the weekend before, and there's not really a lot of incentive for anyone to change course at this juncture. The debate is an obstacle, but hardly one that can't be overcome. Might he have been better served by announcing earlier? Maybe. Probably. Does that mean he can't compete against Hillary? I don't think so - after all, this campaign still has months to go. The debate was just a single moment that will fade. The fundamentals that were dragging Hillary down (and boosting Biden) prior to the debate still exist. In another sense, Biden is already running. He just hasn't announced it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Gyges posted:People like the idea of Biden, but once he jumps in they'll be going off the reality of Biden. He'll have to steal votes from Hillary while all the things that kept him from really being in the hunt for the nomination the last couple runs become the focus. I think you're setting the threshold for a Biden run too high. He only needs a plausible path, not a probable path, to run. That plausibility still exists. Remember, this is a guy who ran for President against Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards in 2008. He has a lot of reason to see his position as much better now than it was - against a smaller slate of candidates with much less star power, and he's a sitting VP.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:And got fourth place. Actually fifth. He finished behind Richardson in IA, then withdrew. The point is that he has run for president with vastly less hope of winning before, there's no reason to think he's suddenly become cautious about running.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Gyges posted:I feel like this would be a better argument a few months ago. He got blown out of the water in 2008 after he'd prepared for the run. Now he's going to try and go against Hillary after she's been preparing for the last 8 years while having to find a way to get to the left of her. Biden's also a smart enough guy to know that a lot of the clamor for his entrance is media wanting a horse race, people who have something to gain from his entry, and people who are going to be a lot more skeptical of his run after they're reminded of some of his positions. I mean, I'm not a Biden fan. I just am pretty positive he's going to run because he has done nothing to indicate anything other than the fact that he is currently running for president. His path is plausible, he can raise money. He is contacting potential staff. He is contacting politicals in early states. He is contacting donors. He has no reason to wait to announce a "no." If the only argument against him is that he will probably lose - well, I think that doesn't weigh well against the evidence otherwise. One is analysis of public sentiment, the other is based on what the Vice President is actually doing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:He is doing literally nothing to indicate he is "currently" running for president. He has very clearly laid the groundwork for a run. He has done everything you would do if you were running except actually announce.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:He's doing everything except going to debates, giving his stump speech, doing town hall discussions in early states, fundraising, ad buys. But other than that he's doing everything Obviously, he can't spend/raise money until he files, and he can't do that until he announces. quote:He is contacting potential staff. He is contacting politicals in early states. He is contacting donors. What was Hillary Clinton doing in January of this year? Giving paid speeches behind closed doors. Didn't do any overt campaign activity right up until she filed, except for the above stuff I just mentioned. I'll also point out that Draft Biden has managed to outraise Martin O'Malley 2-to-1 without even a candidate behind it and made an ad buy during the debate. An ad made by Mark Putnam, who is also a longtime Biden consultant. I don't think Draft Biden has been raising from randos on the Internet - there are serious donors behind it. I mean, if you want to invest in Biden No, sure. I feel very certain he will run, though, and he will announce it soon. I think you guys are just ignoring some clear indicators.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:You could still make like $600 if you bet $850 today. I put $500 in the other day at 49 cents.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RepBrendanBoyle/status/656124056572444672 US Rep Brendan BoyleVerified account @RepBrendanBoyle I have a very good source close to Joe that tells me VP Biden will run for Prez Kind of a weird thing for a congressman to tweet but hey
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
My only regret is buying YES before, and not immediately after, the Democratic debate.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:Really crazy to watch NO shares hit 21 cents and then immediately bounce back up in the 30s. That's not MSNBC's source. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sources-biden-announce-decision-within-48-hours Two sources. Fox News has 3 sources. It's obviously a coordinated push by Biden's team.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Dana Bash ✔ @DanaBashCNN A source familiar with the process tells me Biden associates are setting up interviews for potential campaign staff positions It's a literal 3 network blitz. Sell your no shares.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:There is no way I'm selling at all-time lows. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Gyges posted:If you're going to sell off at a loss you don't do it in the middle of the market freak out as prices are on an unbraked slide. The market is going to rebound at least a little bit after the immediate OH poo poo reaction, more the longer that 48 hour window gets pushed. That's assuming this follows the usual pattern. A burst of activity and then silence. If it's the start of a roll-out, the slide will continue.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
nachos posted:Considering the "caution on the 48 hour timeline" reports there is definitely going to be an upswing at some point. It doesn't take much for the market to freak out. Sure, again that assumes "48 hour timeline" is the last we hear in the next 48 hours. Tomorrow, you could have a specific time and day for an event/press conference (even if it's outside the 48 hour window) and that'll be the end of your no shares. If you think Biden is going to run (and it seems fairly clear he is) you're really gambling on the news cycle by waiting. Holding is at least just as risky as selling.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
nachos posted:@BillKristol Not sure how Biden confirms he's running over lunch when they don't have lunch until 12:30 today. I think he's just trolling.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:It's also Bill Kristol. If Bill Kristol announces the sky is blue, buy shares in sky green, he's literally the most wrong pundit in Washington to the point where it's practically a performance piece. I don't agree. He can announce any time this week and make the Iowa JJ his first major speech. If he doesn't announce by JJ, it'll mean something is seriously dysfunctional. If he were announcing today, we'd likely already know. Edit: Also, just as a note. There's no reason to think Biden's announcement will be a big Trump-esque event. Hillary, for example, announced her candidacy over YouTube and didn't have a big kick off speech until a month later. Biden's schedule would likely be compressed but the point is that there's no reason to think this needs to fit into any particular mold. He could simply file and do a press release, if he wished. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 17:32 on Oct 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Tomato Burger posted:This one should be awesome. I ultimately think this one will end up resolving as NO because there's always little tricks and levers and pockets available to avoid hitting the debt ceiling on the initial prescribed date... I may toss a few bucks that way; need to mull it over a bit longer. 2-week turnaround is nice and short, regardless. I'm not sure that's the right move. We already passed the initial date, and it was already moved from Nov 5 to Nov 3. It could possibly move but I suspect Boehner is just going to put up a clean debt increase and pass it with Dem votes + a few GOPers prior to that. After Nov 3 they have to prioritize spending which means a technical default.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Gyges posted:I don't know what you're going to do with any money you make off No on the Debt Ceiling since we then enter a financial Armageddon. Can we bet in Euros?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
I bailed the moment I saw Biden announcing on Rose Garden with Obama. Slight profit. So it goes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
The Dem NV market is loving ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:The second place for Kasich market is skyrocketing. Someone in the comments said he suspected insider trading and I think everyone jumped on that boat. I'm counting the votes before they even come in!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:rubio NO for second at $.76 seems pretty solid, no? imo rubio 2nd is underpriced and kasich is absurdly overpriced, considering that there was so much bunching up in the polls around 2nd place
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Remember, when Bernie wins Clinton bets are going to be fun as people over react to the loss. There's basically already Berniemania on the markets. Bernie CO was at 75 cents earlier today!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Hillary, in general, is underpriced on Super Tuesday. Colorado's price is particularly bad, given that CO is both less friendly than Iowa and a closed primary whose voter registration deadline expired in early January.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
I wouldn't put too much stock into "ground game" anyway. The rule of thumb is that it moves your final result a couple points at most. And in a primary situation, its value is even more dubious. If SC is very close, it might determine who wins. But in a race where it's more distant it makes little impact.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In this instance I'm talking less making sure your voters show up, and more making sure your voters can vote. Registration is often done by non-partisan groups, but I remember back in 07/08 it was also a focus of the Obama campaign because they recognized that a decent portion of their demographic was those eligible to vote who never had before. Which are also precisely the people the Trump and Bernie campaigns are also energizing, even if they may be a different cohort of the previously non-engaged. I'd make three points: First, same day registration is pretty big in NH but not that big. I'm not sure if the final tally of same day registrants is out, but the exit poll indicated that 5% of the GOP electorate were not previously registered at all when they came out to vote. That comes out to 12,424 votes. Even if we're enormously generous to Trump and give him 60% of those votes, it would still account for a relatively small portion of his win. Second, registration is an enormously difficult and manpower-intensive task. Even a big push (by primary standards) might yield 10-20k registrants in a primary context. And that would be a VERY high number for any GOP primary campaign! A study by Voter Participation Center shows that 65% of registrants from drives would have registered anyway without prompting. And a great number of those net registrants will decide not to vote anyway. VPC estimates that voter registration programs drive turnout up by a net of 1%. And that's not accounting for the vote share of those votes. Opinion is highly volatile in a primary, and many new registrants might decide to vote for other candidates. Third, I wouldn't attempt to "unskew" polls by trying to take into account voter registration. Many polls use samples of the official state voter file to conduct their surveys, so it would pay to check the methodology.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
That poll sucks, but it's better than nothing. My thoughts on NV: 1. Hillary will probably still win. The demographics favor her substantially in this race. 2. There isn't a lot of polling. More likely, there won't be a lot of polling because NV polls are not likely to be predictive and they're very expensive to carry out. I'm not aware of any polling happening right now, so there's a fair chance we will be completely blind going into the caucus. 3. Bernie will probably outperform expectations in this race, as they're currently pretty low. Hillary is furiously downplaying expectations here, and Bernie thinks he's behind by single digits. If there aren't any polls, you're basically betting on a coin flip with very little information if you go into the NV market. It'll be tough to try and flip if the only info you hear is Ralston desperately trying to prove NV is relevant this year prior to the actual results. And Bernie will still probably lose, so you're going to lose money on it. My strategy is playing Bernie.DNOM16.YES - if Bernie can do very well in NV and outperform expectations, there's not a lot of reason he can't also be competitive in states like Texas and California. NV is marginally less white than the US as a whole. So theoretically, Bernie.DOM16.YES should respond pretty positively and you can get 7-8 cent profit. I think it's fairly safe, since Bernie's price isn't likely to drop after Nevada so my losses should be limited if I'm wrong. I still think Bernie Yes is somewhat overpriced, so I'm also counting on the fact that it will stay like that until Super Tuesday. It's not a glamorous profit but I think the risk is managed pretty well. I continue to think Hillary in CO is currently the best value on the market. Bernie NO is priced at 35 cents! It shouldn't really be much easier than NV or IA for Bernie, even if it's one his best March 1 states. My target is at 50 cents. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 19:46 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Dem NV market is going nutty right now, too. These lovely polls are really shaking things up and not in my favor I'm a bit frustrated it hasn't moved the Bernie.DNOM16 market, since I really think a good showing in Nevada is an extremely positive indicator for Bernie. But I suspect there's still profit-taking going on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
New SC PPP poll just dropped.quote:Behind Trump, who has 35 percent support in the poll, U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas are tied for second place — at 18 percent each, according to a Public Policy Polling survey released exclusively Monday to The State. http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article60547281.html edit: whoops already posted sorry :V
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:If someone told me a few months ago that the republican race would be a blowout and the Dem race would be a dead heat I would have called them insane. I saw a guy who said he max'ed out on Bernie YES in South Carolina so maybe not all of them are going to the bank.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
G-Hawk posted:http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...pport.html#more Agreed. OK actually fits Bernie's demographic profile, including outperforming with rural whites. PPP confirms it's close, and PPP has had a heavy Clinton bias in NH and IA. OK is also an open primary, but only for the Democrats.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-02-17/trump-dominates-in-bloomberg-poll-before-south-carolina-primary Selzer SC poll. 36/17/15/13 Trump/Cruz/Rubio/Jeb!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 7, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
Right to Rise did cancel a ton Super Tuesday spending so they could "re-allocate" spending based on the South Carolina results. I think it's a signal that a drop out is coming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2016 20:42
|
|