And yet, it controls your party. Even trump can’t be truthful about it and you thought he was the man in charge.
Let's talk polls and betting odds
- Thread starter leetp
- Start date
Well, you're not wrong. I don't think most reasonable people believe DJT cares much about abortion. Nevertheless, believe in it or not, he was true to his word and delivered where everyone else failed--which is not something any other politician can say.
Oh, and I don't have a party, by the way. There is essentially no difference between the current two parties. Sure their rhetoric sounds different, but they largely govern the same way.
Listened to an interesting interview with former Trump hard line supporter Anthony Scaramuchie who sees the betting thing as distorted by Trump big money supporters to discourage Harris supporters from voting.Has anyone else been as obsessed as I have been with regard to following the election polls and betting odds? I probably check them 50 times a day.
On that topic,
Quinnipiac just dropped a new poll for PA today that has Trump at +2 (49/47).
Susquehanna and CNN also just dropped with a tie at 46/46 and 48/48, respectively.
The RCP composite has just flipped Wisky back to Harris following a flurry of polls favorable to Harris...one being a CNN poll that has Harris at +6
The Wisky flip joins Mich with flipped back to Harris earlier this AM.
Nominal improvement for Trump in the betting markets.
NOTE: I am citing Polymarket only because they provide a real-time chart.
Wild volatility stopped somewhat abruptly around 9:45 this morning where Trump went as low as 53.7% to Harris' 47.1%. Since then, it has gradually trended upward for Trump.
NOTE: I am citing Polymarket only because they provide a real-time chart.
Wild volatility stopped somewhat abruptly around 9:45 this morning where Trump went as low as 53.7% to Harris' 47.1%. Since then, it has gradually trended upward for Trump.
| 8:45 AM Sun | | 6:15 PM Sun | |
| Trump | Harris | Trump | Harris |
BetOnline | 58.0 | 45.9 | 58.0 | 45.9 |
Betfair | 55.3 | 45.1 | 55.6 | 44.6 |
Betsson | 57.1 | 46.5 | 57.1 | 45.5 |
Bovada | 55.6 | 48.8 | 56.5 | 48.8 |
Bwin | 55.6 | 47.6 | 55.6 | 46.5 |
Points Bet | 57.1 | 47.6 | 57.1 | 47.6 |
Polymarket | 55.5 | 44.6 | 55.3 | 44.7 |
Smarkets | 54.4 | 46.7 | 55.3 | 45.1 |
Average | 56.1 | 46.6 | 56.3 | 46.1 |
Don't you feel at least a little dirty citing The Much? I mean, who is even giving that guy an interview?
We've been round and round on this topic. That might well have been true of some markets early on, namely, Polymarket; but there have been many billions in volume across countless betting markets since. They all had Trump sitting between 60 and 65% with Harris slipping below 40% at one point. Insisting that any group or interest is driving betting markets for such a dubious end really stretches reason beyond the breaking point, don't you think? Maybe it's possible, but I really don't think so.
Where did you find the white supremist supporting Harris info? This would indicate to me that they see enough evil in Trump to even overcome their racial bias.
I take this as being someone who is able to see bigger issues at hand than his racial bias.
www.newsweek.com
Kamala Harris gets surprising support from alt-right's Richard Spencer
Spencer endorsed the vice president in a social media post on Friday.
www.newsweek.com
🙄 Come on man....I thought you were going to engage in serious discussion.I take this as being someone who is able to see bigger issues at hand than his racial bias.
Kamala Harris gets surprising support from alt-right's Richard Spencer
Spencer endorsed the vice president in a social media post on Friday.
Seriously, if this is what you were referring to, how else would you comprehend it?
Last edited:
That is what I was referring to.
I didn't really invest any energy into looking into it or really even thinking about it at all. I just saw the headline, went 'huh, that's funny,' and then went about my business. I don't know who the guy is, and I don't care to. The last thing I would surmise is that he thinks Trump is so bad that he would go against his 'white supremacy' ideology to vote for Harris. Isn't Trump supposed to be racist too? Make this make sense...or, well, you know what, don't. Because it's absurd.
I see all this white supremacist crap as just as overblown as all the other crap the media insists on dwelling upon. It's another stupid distraction to divide us and make us hate one another (ironic, isn't it?). Hate groups have had no power or clout in my lifetime (I was born in the 70s).
Would you not expect a racist to support someone who agrees with their racial views?
You still have not given any viable reason a known white supremist would endorse Harris at this time. As far as the hate, do you even hear the words that come out of trumps mouth.
Saying he does what he says, is not a good thing when he threatens putting people like Liz Cheney, General Miley and others who do not agree with him in front of a firing squad. Trump promotes and thrives on hate. I can't remember ever hearing anything from him that would not make me believe what I hear from people who know and/or have worked closely with him who are subsequently sounding the alarm about the danger he presents.
I see no difference between Trump and the autocrats he seems to support. Have you ever heard any comments from Trump that are not favorable to Putin? Ask him a direct question related to Putin and he will give some compliment about him and then jump to one of his rants to deflect the question.
Do you not believe that our foreign enemies have acted to support trump?
My comments are what I believe to be facts based simply on what I see and hear in words that come out of mouth.
Last edited:
538 has Trump with 53% chance to win against Harris' 46% chance.
projects.fivethirtyeight.com
Based on state-by-state aggregate polling average, it looks like Nate Silver and his Silver Bulletin blog has Trump favored to win as well. But he doesn't give it a percentage.
www.natesilver.net
Who Is Favored To Win The 2024 Presidential Election?
538’s 2024 presidential election forecast model showing Democrat Kamala Harris’s and Republican Donald Trump’s chances of winning.
Based on state-by-state aggregate polling average, it looks like Nate Silver and his Silver Bulletin blog has Trump favored to win as well. But he doesn't give it a percentage.
FINAL Silver Bulletin 2024 presidential election forecast
All the numbers for Trump vs. Harris.
www.natesilver.net
Happy Election Day Eve, TI!
Betting markets on the uptick for Trump. I'll post my usual table a little later in the AM.
Betting markets on the uptick for Trump. I'll post my usual table a little later in the AM.
On the popular vote a $100 dollar bet gets you $275 if Trump wins the popular vote. If I were a betting man, I'd be tempted to take that bet. There are at least some respected pollsters that have the popular vote either tide or with in a slight lead.
All you fools remember this post in a few days. It was Dobbs all along. That's it.
Nate Silver--of whom I occasionally criticize for being too partisan--has some really interesting things to say about the state of polling in this race.
Essentially, having so many pollsters predicting a race within 2.5 percentage points is itself a statistical anomaly. Nate contends, in fact, did it say 1 and 9.5 trillion (😳) chance of such an anomaly. At first I thought this was just hyperbole, but it's apparently an actually calculated statistical value.
I guess pollsters have lost so much credibility over the last couple election cycles. They are effectively selling their souls just to not be too wrong.
Ultimately, Nate doesn't think it's going to be that close in the end. I think he's right, I just don't know which way it's going to go.
www.natesilver.net
Essentially, having so many pollsters predicting a race within 2.5 percentage points is itself a statistical anomaly. Nate contends, in fact, did it say 1 and 9.5 trillion (😳) chance of such an anomaly. At first I thought this was just hyperbole, but it's apparently an actually calculated statistical value.
I guess pollsters have lost so much credibility over the last couple election cycles. They are effectively selling their souls just to not be too wrong.
Ultimately, Nate doesn't think it's going to be that close in the end. I think he's right, I just don't know which way it's going to go.
There’s more herding in swing state polls than at a sheep farm in the Scottish Highlands
Some pollsters aren’t telling you what their data really says.
www.natesilver.net
Last edited:
Here is an interesting graph from Pew Research in Polling Errors in US Presidential Elections since 1936:
Per Pew, and others, Pollsters made a significant change to polling methodology after 2020. This apparently led to "“polls were more accurate in 2022 than in any cycle since at least 1998, with almost no bias toward either party.” (The quote was lifted from the same Pew article but was quoting FiveThirtyEight--presumably Nate Silver himself).
Here's a bit of a rant:
Given Pew is first and foremost a research center, it is disappointing they just used FiveThirtyEight's research and did attempt to gauge poling accuracy themselves. The Pew Trust, where Pew receives its funding, was founded on conservative principles but drifted hard left throughout the 80's (per influencewatch.org). Quoting influencewatch.org: "By 1993 all grants to the right had been eliminated, although the trusts did give $150,000 to conservative organizations in 1994. But by 1986 liberal groups were getting three times as much money as conservative ones, and by 1994 liberals were getting 40 times as much money from Pew as conservatives."
Ultimately, it's all one big leftist self-licking ice cream cone.
Here's a bit of a rant:
Given Pew is first and foremost a research center, it is disappointing they just used FiveThirtyEight's research and did attempt to gauge poling accuracy themselves. The Pew Trust, where Pew receives its funding, was founded on conservative principles but drifted hard left throughout the 80's (per influencewatch.org). Quoting influencewatch.org: "By 1993 all grants to the right had been eliminated, although the trusts did give $150,000 to conservative organizations in 1994. But by 1986 liberal groups were getting three times as much money as conservative ones, and by 1994 liberals were getting 40 times as much money from Pew as conservatives."
Ultimately, it's all one big leftist self-licking ice cream cone.
Betting market moving back to Trump this AM:
For all the talk of Trumper's being hoodwinked on the betting markets, could be that it was actually the Harris supports?
| 8:45 AM Sun | | 9:45 AM Mon | |
| Trump | Harris | Trump | Harris |
BetOnline | 58.0 | 45.9 | 59.8 | 43.7 |
Betfair | 55.6 | 44.6 | 58.2 | 42.0 |
Betsson | 57.1 | 45.5 | 58.8 | 45.5 |
Bovada | 56.5 | 48.8 | 58.3 | 45.5 |
Bwin | 55.6 | 46.5 | 59.2 | 45.5 |
Points Bet | 57.1 | 47.6 | 60.6 | 44.4 |
Polymarket | 55.3 | 44.7 | 58.7 | 41.4 |
Smarkets | 55.3 | 46.7 | 57.5 | 42.7 |
Average | 56.3 | 46.3 | 58.9 | 43.8 |
For all the talk of Trumper's being hoodwinked on the betting markets, could be that it was actually the Harris supports?
Yes you do. She's going to win a not very close race.Nate Silver--of whom I occasionally criticize for being too partisan--has some really interesting things to say about the state of polling in this race.
Essentially, having so many pollsters predicting a race within 2.5 percentage points is itself a statistical anomaly. Nate contends, in fact, did it say 1 and 9.5 trillion (😳) chance of such an anomaly. At first I thought this was just hyperbole, but it's apparently an actually calculated statistical value.
I guess pollsters have lost so much credibility over the last couple election cycles. They are effectively selling their souls just to not be too wrong.
Ultimately, Nate doesn't think it's going to be that close in the end. I think he's right, I just don't know which way it's going to go.
There’s more herding in swing state polls than at a sheep farm in the Scottish Highlands
Some pollsters aren’t telling you what their data really says.
Here is an interesting graph from Pew Research in Polling Errors in US Presidential Elections since 1936:
I get a kick out of how dramatic this line graph appears. If you set the scale from 0 - 100% there's barely a gap at all and is essentially overlapping flat line since 10/26.The only new poll out today so far is the national daily tracking poll from TIPP:
From Barron's
If polls prove accurate, Harris has 226 electoral college votes and Trump has 219. Seven states, with 93 electoral votes total, will decide the race.
✕
Source: 270towin.com
If polls prove accurate, Harris has 226 electoral college votes and Trump has 219. Seven states, with 93 electoral votes total, will decide the race.
Kansas
6 electoral college votes✕
Source: 270towin.com
You may be right, but imagine basing your selection for president on the ability to kill an unborn baby. That blows my mind.
Thist chart from TIPP is interesting:
maga influencer caught emailing fake polls to himself and then posting them on Twatter as legit.
They are just laying the groundwork to claim fraud. I don't have time to look but would not be surprised if @fatpiggy has shared this guys twats on here,
imagine basing your selection for president on the ability to prevent women from making decisions on their own healthcare. That blows my mind.
Here is an interesting graph from Pew Research in Polling Errors in US Presidential Elections since 1936:
In 2022 the polls showed a red tsunami that never happened. In this election, the polls and betting sites are being manipulated to lay the groundwork for trump to claim the election was stolen again.
The "media hype" was for a red tsunami that was gradually tempered as the polls came in. The polls largely got it right.
Seeing as how nearly every pollster has a left bias, just how are they being manipulated? I am ready to believe you if you can present a cogent argument.
Same for the betting markets. There are billions in bet volume with real money being placed at risk for such a dubious return on investment. Make it make sense.
What does this have to do with my post? The image is linked directly from tippinsights.com?maga influencer caught emailing fake polls to himself and then posting them on Twatter as legit.
They are just laying the groundwork to claim fraud. I don't have time to look but would not be surprised if @fatpiggy has shared this guys twats on here,
As for what is conveys, I'm not really sure how a model can integrate betting market behavior and polling data, its what it reports is no doubt suspect.
Last edited:
Latest poll drop:
| Race | Poll | Trmup | Harris | Spread |
| Pennsylvania | The Hill/Emerson | 49 | 48 | Trump+1 |
| Michigan | The Hill/Emerson | 48 | 50 | Harris+2 |
| Ohio | The Hill/Emerson | 54 | 42 | Trump+12 |
| Wisconsin | The Hill/Emerson | 49 | 49 | Tie |
| North Carolina | The Hill/Emerson | 49 | 48 | Trump+1 |
| North Carolina | East Carolina U. | 50 | 48 | Trump+2 |
| Georgia | The Hill/Emerson | 50 | 49 | Trump+1 |
| Georgia | East Carolina U. | 50 | 49 | Trump+1 |
| Arizona | The Hill/Emerson | 50 | 48 | Trump+2 |
| Nevada | The Hill/Emerson | 48 | 48 | Tie |
| National | TIPP | 48 | 48 | Tie |
| National | NPR/PBS/Marist | 47 | 51 | Harris+4 |
I’ve read that many of these polls are being manipulated by a Frenchman who has not preference for either candidate, but is just doing it for his own amusement. Apparently he’s already put $30 million into this effort.
Latest betting markets:
| 9:45 AM Mon | | 1:15 PM Mon | |
| Trump | Harris | Trump | Harris |
BetOnline | 59.8 | 43.7 | 64.9 | 42.9 |
Betfair | 58.2 | 42.0 | 59.2 | 41.0 |
Betsson | 58.8 | 45.5 | 60.6 | 43.5 |
Bovada | 58.3 | 45.5 | 60.0 | 43.5 |
Bwin | 59.2 | 45.5 | 60.8 | 43.5 |
Points Bet | 60.6 | 44.4 | 61.7 | 43.5 |
Polymarket | 58.7 | 41.4 | 57.7 | 42.4 |
Smarkets | 57.5 | 42.7 | 58.5 | 41.7 |
Average | 58.9 | 43.8 | 60.4 | 42.7 |
It's not the polls that are reported as being manipulated--that's a practical impossibility.
What's been reported is that one of the betting markets, namely polymarket, was artificially inflated by a few "whales"--i.e. big money bets coming in on Trump. Back when the bet volume was low, this may well have been the case. But polymarket's bet volume alone is over $3 billion. I don't know this for sure, but I suspect it gets pretty hard for a few individuals to drive the market at that volume--especially for such a dubious return.
Also, the numbers I post are from several of the more popular sports books. Similar to polls, having a few individuals manipulate all of these (again, to what end?) is a practically impossible.
Copy and paste from polymarket.com
$3,078,829,851 Vol.
Nov 5, 2024
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
Tim Brando to the rescue. It is amazing how the SeCspn continually beats up on us.- Latest: 152thinblueline
-
-
