I'm left of Marx, and this is where I've arrived. Not my choice. I'm more or less sane and have eyes, so I'm stuck here.
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...ne-july-5.html
Printable View
I'm left of Marx, and this is where I've arrived. Not my choice. I'm more or less sane and have eyes, so I'm stuck here.
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...ne-july-5.html
Somebody left of Marx would be against the existence of casinos.
Let's leave Groucho out of all gambling discussions, shall we?
It's an annoying phrase because there are actual Marxists and anarchists in this world, so it only works as hyperbole if you identify all politics with American politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
GAMBLERS OF THE WORLD UNITE YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS
.
.
.
whatever anyone might think of Marx - I think there are few who would deny that he was one of the most influential people in the history of the world
no, I'm not a Marxist - but I've read "The Communist Manifesto" more than once - and I'm tremendously impressed by the power of his writing
I've read several other works of political philosophy - and though I would agree with their points of view much more than I do with Marx's - the words don't jump out of the page and demand that you pay attention as Marx's words do
it's no surprise that so many leaders became Dictators and harmed their own countries by trying in some way to put his ideas into practice
.
He was a man of his times, helping to lubricate the social and political change from agrarian / rural to industrial / city.
The fatal flaw: men are too GREEDY to share equally.
On paper marxism looks like a utopia but it goes against human nature. Under capitalism those that produce the most make the most money. With marxisms equality of outcome all the fast widget makers in the factory, not making more than the slower ones, slowed down to the speed of the slowest widget maker in the factory. Human nature that they refuse to carry someone else’s weight. Consequently, Since not many widgets were being produced there were no widgets on the store shelf’s to be bought. The whole thing collapsed because of lack of productivity.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
For your perusal:
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...h-avatars.html
As I write this at 6am Friday, July 12, today feels like the end of the Biden saga, meaning re-election campaign to me. It feels like by sundown he will not be running for re-election. Being stubborn, Mr Biden could possibly drag it into the weekend, but today just feels like the day to me. :rolleyes:
There was no reason for this situation. Regardless of political position, it has been apparent since late last year that Biden was declining and fairly rapidly. He had some good days mixed in with the bad, which happens, the SOTU address being a particularly good day/night, which only served to cover up the inevitable. At least cover it up from those of us "common folks". Biden's aides and operative along with his family that see and deal with him daily, had to know. So, THIS mess is all on them. In particular Jill Biden. there was just no need for this situation to have occurred.
And what were they thinking? Suppose Joe had done not as disastrous at the debate 2 weeks ago. Wouldn't have changed anything. We would have gone through the election with one of the two major choices being a guy who was not up to, nor going to be able to do the job much longer. That isn't fair to the voters.
I don't know how Harris will fare against Trump. I think the Dems would like to jump over her, but they can't. But none of that even matters. There was just no need for this situation. Biden should have announced at the start of the year, or even into the primary season that he wasn't running for re-election.
It is all on them. It's also on the "mainstream media" to the extent that they didn't ask the proper questions, follow-up, and demand answers. It's basically been a complete misrepresentation of abilities and health, with a screening/reporting process via media that actually exacerbated the problem and enabled the people misrepresenting reality.
Bottom line: it's close to a real-life Weekend at Bernie's, only with massive, grave consequences.
I blame it on Jill, the "un-Melania" for keeping Joe in the game.
From what I gather she shepherds, protects and moves her husband around like a sheep dog herds sheep in order to keep his infirmity from being glaringly obvious: hello no press conferences for eight months!
No doubt her motivation is the retention of power and respect: I mean Delaware will be a drag compared to DC.
Oh well, time to ride the rails back home, girlie...and take that old man with ya.
Tootles...
Today's events are even more shocking to me. By all accounts, almost all support for Biden continuing has dried up. Some of that publicly with more and more democrats blatantly calling for him to end his campaign and even more so happening behind the scenes, like last night's discussion between Pelosi and Obama. Further reports indicate that fundraising contributions, especially from the bigger donors has slowed to a trickle. And yet, Biden is on his way to a campaign event in Michigan. Almost in a state of defiance.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
the only thing I can think of is that maybe there is some intentional dragging of the feet, wanting Trump to pick his VP (Vance, Rubio, or the other guy...the governor) so that he doesn't pivot and pick a female hoping to offset Harris.
But it is sort of fun being on Biden watch, if you are a political junkie. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawgIt would take too long to find and post all the times he hasQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
)Quit forums
)Declared that he will no longer interact with MDawg
)Declared that he will no longer interact with R.Singer
only to return within a matter of days if not hours.
But I could probably find and post a dozen of those "never again vows" pretty quickly. Besides the fact that he is an indecisive twit, this sort of thing also ebs and flows with his manic depression.
V, you have the shittiest takes for someone who claims to vote Libertarian. Find me the part of the LP platform that says people should share equally:Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmOn paper marxism looks like a utopia but it goes against human nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
https://www.lp.org/platform/
Marxism looks like a utopia ... if you're a parasite.
I'm not a Marxist (it's a religion, really, with unprovable tenets); I'm left of Marx.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomV, you have the shittiest takes for someone who claims to vote Libertarian. Find me the part of the LP platform that says people should share equally:Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmOn paper marxism looks like a utopia but it goes against human nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
https://www.lp.org/platform/
Marxism looks like a utopia ... if you're a parasite.
I don't think everyone should reap the same regardless of their sowing, but I think a culture is stronger (think Sparta) if everyone begins with the same bag of seeds.
Sparta was famously criticized for the inequality of wealth of the Spartiates.
I was talking about that being a tenet of Marxist belief, not Libertarian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Perignom
Besides, I don't pay much attention to what the Libertarian platform provides, I mainly vote that way to be contrarian, to discharge my "civic duty" of voting so that I can later bitch and whine about things with a clear conscience.
I still am interested in Libertarianism because in college I met the guy behind it at that time and we talked about it over beer, and that made it personal for me.
Their beliefs come closer to how I'd want to live in a perfect world but this world is far from perfect.
But...were a Libertarian to win...I wouldn't really care one way or another: while I follow politics I am not engaged in it, other than to criticize, hurl brickbats and of course make snide remarks.
I have no political lawn signs, no flag on my car, and have never contributed any money to a candidate: I simply try to stay informed and amused.
This makes sense given your Stir the pot for no reason other than to stir the pot, and Support the underdog not because I believe in him but because he's the underdog, attitudes and actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
It appeared to me you were legitimizing the premise that sharing and equality are desirable.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
(starts at 1:31)
https://youtu.be/pB2VJp0aSUE?si=jgiiSLASLWJn7yVR&t=91
The Austrian School (of economics) argues that free markets (and competition) are the best allocators of resources:
https://www.independent.org/students...ay.asp?id=2042
Those circumstances will never prevail if everyone's afraid of being greedy.Quote:
Market prices, he argues, signal to producers and consumers the relative scarcity of resources. They tell producers how to combine resources in the ways that produce the most value for consumers, and tell consumers when they should expand or contract their consumption of various goods and services. Hayek pointed out that the information communicated to market participants through the price system is decentralized, localized, and often inarticulate. This knowledge, he argued, exists only in a divided, diffused form, throughout the members of society. As such, centralized decision makers have no way to access its most important elements.
Is that in the social contract I signed? I don't vote at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Biden watch 2. :D Last Friday I posted the above, noting that it could drag into the weekend. Well then on Saturday, an assassination attempt on ex-President Trump changed everything, buying Biden more time as he was forced to make some presidential comments and speeches.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Well, now almost a week later, we are back to where we were last Friday. Don't know if it is going to happen Today (thursday) or Tomorrow, or if stubborn old Joe drags us through the weekend, but this is going to happen. It is probably going to take Barack Obama to give him that final kick in the pants, which Obama has been reluctant to do.
The reason this HAS to happen is the polls that came out yesterday which can be seen at RCP today. They called them swing states, but they included several states like Ohio, North Carolina, which aren't really swing states. But Pa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Virginia, plus the previous mentioned Ohio, and North Carolina. In every single poll Biden is down 4-7 points. And here is the really bad part for Dems. Most of these states have senate races, with democratic incumbent senators. And polled separately, the democratic senators are winning every single one of these states. That is proof of President Biden underperforming by 10 points.
BUT, the elections do not happen separately. Because they happen together, Biden will drag each and every one of these Senators down with him, along with dozens of house races. THAT is why the Democrats have to remove him. Not because he will lose, but because he takes everyone down with him. Maybe Harris will as well, but we don't know that yet. Just maybe she will be a little more competitive and even if she loses, not drag the whole boat down with her. THAT is what the democrats have to find out.
Oh and the betting Markets are the real indicator that this is going to happen. More so that polls. Polls can be made so say what the polling people want. Betting markets tell where people are putting their money, not their heart.
And full disclosure: I do have a betting interest in Harris becoming the democratic Nominee, which I made several weeks ago. And it has nothing to do with preference. It has to do with what I felt HAD to happen. Biden had to be removed and they had to go to Harris. They can't jump over her for fear of pissing off the blacks AND losing the 100 million dollars the Biden-Harris campaign has on hand. If they pick her, she can have access to that money. Anyone else can't.
Maybe Uncle Joe can convince Hunter to shoot him, too, in the ear, but with a BB gun not an AR-15, and thus gain sympathy for the alleged "assassination attempt."
Normally it would be tough to pull this off, what with Joe having Secret Service protection, but given their recent performance in Butler they'd likely miss seeing (let alone stopping) a cement mixer speeding full bore toward our fearless leader.
Heck, Hunter was his dad's bag man before so why not be his "attempted assassin" next?
Whatever it takes for the Biden clan to retain power...hello "sympathy."
Just an opinion, but I don't think Trump is getting or will get much of a sympathy vote bumps, as say Ronald Reagan did. Everything with Trump is already baked in. 40 some % support him and like him, 40 some percent (slightly more I believe) can't stand him and won't vote for him. And sympathy isn't going to change those numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What has changed those numbers just a few points, and that is all it takes, is just a few independents feeling like one guy just is not mentally capable of doing the job. Once you remove that nuance, I think you go right back to a razor thin race.
Two things, one of which I'm proud. Not so much the other.
1) This was written on the 14th. I got most things right vis-a-vis the assassination attempt. I went out on a limb on a couple of observations before most people did, but I know people who shoot (professionally), so thought I was correct. Most of what I said was verified later. A lot of reporting is about getting things right while writing under deadline.
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...of-donald.html
2) I'm a little embarrassed to be this cold-blooded, but as soon as I realized Trump had survived, I plunked down money on him. I had held off because I always thought Michelle Obama might enter the fray. But I got a couple bucks down at Even money one offshore and another couple hundred down at -190 at Northbet. At the time, most places had it off the board. That is cold, as they say, but it'll finance my next Vic and Anthony's excursion, so what the hell.
As Rob likes to remind us, we little people can't be choosers.
You got money down on Trump at Even money after he was shot? Sounds like BS as Trump hasn't been even money for months. But whatever.
And the you put more money at -190. Good for you. Buy stocks at high point. Great strategy. :rolleyes:
My wagers aren't necessarily about winning. I have one on Harris to win and one on Dems to win. As soon as Harris becomes the candidate, that wager becomes a winning wager with hedging opportunities. My second wager will become a winner as soon as the race tightens for whatever reason....and it will. A hundred different things could happen or be said between now and November that would cause the race to tighten and that is all I need.
Buy high. Great strategy. ;)
God, you are such a moron. "Sounds like BS?" When have I ever quoted a number here that was wrong in 10,000 posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Tell you what. I'll bet you 10K, 20K, whatever, that I got Trump at Even money. Or even 1K and a $6.50 cup of Golden Nugget Starbucks coffee.
Now don't go and die on me or get robbed or have your money stolen in a backroom or something before you make the wager. Todd can hold the funds. Better yet, MDawg can hold the funds. MDawg, you up for this?
Get the money to Todd or MDawg. I'll meet either and provide the dated "Bet Pending" in person. Unless you survive your latest back-rooming, stabbing, Covid, arm-breaking, or death and can do it in person. I'm flexible. And please tell Count Dracula I said hello. I know many undead, but you and he are my faves.
Yeah, the old "I will bet you your net worth", internet forum pissing contest (that has NEVER happened). :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzGod, you are such a moron. "Sounds like BS?" LOL. When have I ever quoted a number here that was wrong in 10,000 posts? I will bet you your net worth that I got money on Trump at Even money after the shooting. And here's the kicker for KJ haters. I bet it at a site where KJ claims to have had an account. Of course, KJ claims many things.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Tell you what. I'll bet you 10K, 20K, whatever, that I got Trump at Even money. And we can bet another 10K, 20K, whatever, that it's a site where you claim to have had an account.
Now don't go and die on me or get robbed or have your money stolen in a backroom or something before you make the wager. Todd can hold the funds. Better yet, MDawg can hold the funds. MDawg, you up for this?
We will just keep track as things unfold and update.
My two wagers are Democrats win the election @ +240 and Harris to win @ +650 (wish I had bet @ +900 but I didn't)
You have Trump to win at even money (or so you say) and another bet at -190.
Easy peasy. We will see how it goes and I will update the day I make any hedging bets.
I intend to win both my wagers (combined with hedging opportunities, whoever wins the election):rolleyes:
I am so goddamn sick of you, kewlJ. You said, "Sounds like BS as Trump hasn't been even money for months." As if you, some anonymous internet maroon who spews bullshit left and right regarding damned near everything, knows what the odds have been with your omniscient scouting.
Instead of coming to the conclusion that maybe the guy who has gambled on offshore sites for more years than you've been alive is correct, you decide that it sounds like BS. This from the guy who fakes his own death and makes shit up every other post.
Put up some fucking money on that BS crack or say, "I was fucking wrong and have too big a mouth for my wallet." Or I swear I will track your ass down, and you will wish you were in the South Point backroom again.
And unlike Rob or MDawg, I will track you down. Bet on it.
Or I swear I will track your ass down, and you will wish you were in the South Point backroom again. And unlike Rob or MDawg, I will track you down. Bet on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The very same physical threat that Moses made and attempted to implement. AND was banned from this site for.
What the fuck is the matter and has happened to you Redietz? :confused:
lul, You know it's bad when even progressive redietz is bashing the shit out of QueerJ.
When redietz said for you to post money with druff you should have told him to post money with druff first since the bet is his idea. And since he would have to go first it insures the bet never happens because redietz is to chickenshit to contact druff about anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJOr I swear I will track your ass down, and you will wish you were in the South Point backroom again. And unlike Rob or MDawg, I will track you down. Bet on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The very same physical threat that Moses made and attempted to implement. AND was banned from this site for.
What the fuck is the matter and has happened to you Redietz? :confused:
What’s it been? Over a year? Have you heard Ditz on a radio show or podcast yet? Chickenshit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJOr I swear I will track your ass down, and you will wish you were in the South Point backroom again. And unlike Rob or MDawg, I will track you down. Bet on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The very same physical threat that Moses made and attempted to implement. AND was banned from this site for.
What the fuck is the matter and has happened to you Redietz? :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
https://i.imgur.com/FREfUgkh.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcap
Bbbwwwwwaaahhhhh, the r-e-dietz say he gonna hunt down the kewl-j and make him pay, hey hey!!!!
Here we go,..Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
And so this Biden thing is done.
I currently have $1200 on Harris to win the presidency, which is 4 different bets made at different times over the last few weeks at odds ranging from +650 to +440. (Average @ +575).
I believe those bets are now almost instantaneous winner because as soon as the new odds come out, I can hedge, guaranteeing a healthy win.
I also have additional money at Democrats to win the presidency @ +140 and +175. Similarly, these wagers weren't about Democrats winning, just the race tightening so I can hedge those as well, guaranteeing a win.
The only bad part is the amount I could wager was limited and money will be tied up for 4 months. The last is no big deal.
Rob's friend, Rachel Maddow seems out of control. She first said this "guarantees" the first black female President and followed that up with "Trump and Vance will absolutely lose".
Cracks me up when people think with their emotions or heart rather than their brain. :rolleyes: First Harris is now going to come under a lot of scrutiny and attacks. Lets see how she handles that. And second I think this resets this race as the very close race it should always have been. Trump got 46% in both 2016 and 2020. I don't see him increasing that any now, with all his baggage. I don't see him winning over any new supporters. I don't know where Harris's support will settle. She wouldn't be my choice like in a primary season. So we will just see how it shakes out.
But anyone like Ms Maddow, thinking this is a slam dunk for Dems now has lost their mind. I see a very close election and @ +140, +175, and very happy with my wagers in a very close election. Although I will probably hedge those bets too at some point, reducing the risk.
.
the electoral college system really, really sucks - it needs to be flushed - but it won't be
one person, one vote, most votes wins
so much, much better
right now, because a person lives in Ca. their vote counts much more than does a person's vote who lives in Maine
in America the system somehow got twisted into this farcical thing
so very, very ridiculous and horrible imo
.
In my experience nobody outside the gambling world, included experts or "experts" of all kinds, is capable of appreciating the uncertainty of things. Everything is a black-and-white, 100% lock this or that thing is going to happen.
.
polling before Biden dropped out shows Harris pretty strong vs. T - see link
she was ahead in 2 polls and tied in another
and the righties beloved Fox News had her only down by one point
an argument could be made that these polls are meaningless
but I don't think so
I think she will appeal to a great many people
.
.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-ap...ng&w=728&h=486
.
UNKewlJ doesn't have two nickels to rub together, let alone $1200. to bet, on anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
https://i.imgur.com/Mtb6Qt1m.jpg
And stop lying about how you predicted any sort of timeline accurately. All your ever changing timeline and willingness to lie about your predictions to try to make it seem like you said something other than you did in fact say prove is that...Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachBelly
was your prediction, made June 30th.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Actually, you can do the math and break this all down by race, which is what I reported on four or five years ago in my blog. The electoral college, in essence, makes white votes worth something north of 1.1 votes each, which is a big deal when you get to 100 million voters.
Ah, to be white, male, and German, like me. We're thinking of suing for reparations during Vance's first term. My German cousins got hosed after WW II, so we need some recompense.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Actually, you can do the math and break this all down by race, which is what I reported on four or five years ago in my blog. The electoral college, in essence, makes white votes worth something north of 1.1 votes each, which is a big deal when you get to 100 million voters.
Ah, to be white, male, and German, like me. We're thinking of suing for reparations during Vance's first term. My German cousins got hosed after WW II, so we need some recompense.
Hilary won the popular vote in 2016 by close to 3 million votes - 65,853,514 to T's 62,984,828
but she got beat in the electoral college ______________ouch
.
I'd support a Constitutional amendment / amendments which do the following:
Abolish the electoral college and decide the election solely by popular vote'
Prohibit PAC's, corporations or any entities other than individuals from donating to a politician or a political cause, and limiting the amount to $10K per person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
The hell with that crap, V. You might wind up with a democracy. As mickey likes to point out, the US is a federal republic, not a democracy. As the CIA has defined us, we're an anocracy. Here's an oldies but goodies:
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...cracy-now.html
and
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...-anocracy.html
It has never been explained clearly to me, just what the purpose or usefulness of the electoral college was. But whatever it was, it has long outlived that usefulness, to the point that it now disenfranchises most of the voters in this country. Anyone living in one of 42-44 states that is not one of the "swing states" and is easily predicted how your state will vote, your vote has almost no significance right now. And that includes all the most populous states.
But because this antiquated system has favored one side for the last quarter century, winning the presidency twice when they lost the popular vote, with a 3rd election, 2020, 3 states and about 90,000 votes could have turned the election, despite a popular vote landslide the other way.
So the republicans aren't going to be willing to change anything until it turns and bites them in the ass. And that scenario isn't that far away. Texas is a state trending the wrong way for republicans. One of these cycles, probably not this one or next, Texas will go blue by the slimmest of margins, and when it does, a very slim margin will win the democrats all those electoral votes. You could have a situation where the democrats win several big states by slim margins and lose most of the country by wide margins, and win the lection despite losing the popular vote. THEN the republicans will be screaming to change things. :D
the link describes pretty cogently the reasoning behind those who favor the electoral collegeQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
that's not to say that I in any way agree with it
the most important point the writer makes:
quote - "The Electoral College maintains a federal system of government and representation. Their reasoning is that in a formal federal structure important powers are reserved to the States. In the U.S. for example the House of Representatives was designed to represent the States according to the size of their population. And the Electoral College was designed to represent each State's choice for the Presidency. To abolish the Electoral College would strike at the very heart of the federal structure laid out in our Constitution and would lead to nationalization of our central government - to the detriment of the States."
the number of each State's electoral votes are the number of its Senators (which is two) plus the number of its Representatives
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/...0College_0.pdf
.
I am aware of all that. But meanwhile You have Pennsylvania 13 million people, Michigan, 10 million, Wisconis 5.9 million, that currently decide our elections. That is less than 9% of the population of this country. Add in 3 more states that are the current true swing states, Georgia, 3.7 million, Arizona, 7 million, and Nevada 3 million, and about 12% of the populations votes even matter. If you are one of the other 88% in one of the other 44 states, your vote is meaningless. It REALLY is!Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smokethe link describes pretty cogently the reasoning behind those who favor the electoral collegeQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
that's not to say that I in any way agree with it
the most important point the writer makes:
quote - "The Electoral College maintains a federal system of government and representation. Their reasoning is that in a formal federal structure important powers are reserved to the States. In the U.S. for example the House of Representatives was designed to represent the States according to the size of their population. And the Electoral College was designed to represent each State's choice for the Presidency. To abolish the Electoral College would strike at the very heart of the federal structure laid out in our Constitution and would lead to nationalization of our central government - to the detriment of the States."
the number of each State's electoral votes are the number of its Senators (which is two) plus the number of its Representatives
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/...0College_0.pdf
.
If we elected by popular vote, EVERY vote would matter just the same. If a republican candidate could go to deep blue New York and pick up a few votes or a democratic candidate, went to deep red Montana (say hi to Mickey) and picked up a few votes, they would count just as much as those votes in Michigan, and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Th electoral college disenfranchises 90% of voters.
The problem is you need 75% of the states to support to make an electoral college change. Those small states way out-number the large states.
.
one day after Biden dropped out a poll was taken by a University and T shows a slight edge
but the article states there is no clear leader as the results are within the margin of error - see link
and then there's this - which gave me a nice morning chuckle - "Let's Go Brandon" is of course a fudging of words that came to mean "eff Joe Biden"
.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTKKcJEX...pg&name=medium
https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3901
.
So, who placed bets on who the running mate will be? I'm putting imaginary money on Mark Kelly.
I don't see betting lines for VP pick at the sportsbooks I currently deal with and am not going to open a new account just to bet that. But I am keeping an eye on my current books and should a line appear, I might consider a wager on Shapiro, if the odds were ok, based on my own process of eliminationQuote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Whitmer - out. can't have 2 women
Buttigieg - out. too risky for 1st woman candidate and 1st gay guy on same ticket.
Newsome - out. Residency problem. Can't have pres and VP from same state or that states electoral votes don't count. I also don't think Newsome is looking to play second fiddle. he has his eye set on running for President, not VP
Beshear - out. Dont know too much about him other than he is a democrat that won governor in a very red state, Kentucky. That is impressive, but Dem's aren't going to win Kentucky in a presidential, so don't know what he would add to the ticket.
Cooper -mostly out. Similarly, democrat won Governor in red leaning North Carolina. Dems always think NC is in play. It never is. Also 67 and I think Dems are looking for younger to really avoid that "age" issue
Mark Kelly - 2nd choice. Could help win Arizona. Likeable and popular. Something about him just doesn't seem like presidential material to me.
Josh Shapiro My pick (but only at decent odds). Could help win Pa which is a must win for Dems. He is Jewish and some Jewish support has eroded from Dems based on the War, so he could help sure up Jewish vote.
It might be asking a bit much to have a ticket with a black/Asian woman and a Jew.
Whatever, Trump has a feisty opponent in Kamala: I just watched the opening of her first rally and she was actually pretty damned impressive.
Can't wait to watch the two of them debate: it will go a lot different this time: she'll kick the old fart's butt to the curb!
"Kamala is BRAT"
not much chance of that - I would say save your $ on that oneQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ;180723
[B
Jews are only 2.4% of the U.S. adult population
and so many have prejudices towards them
they are 11% in NY State but the State is already pretty solidly blue
agree with Mr. V that she would not choose a VP with minority ethnicity
it's all but a sure thing that her pick will be a white Christian male
and if she wins not only would she be the first female Prez; her husband Doug Emhoff would be the nation's first "First Gentleman" in the White House
.
Is there really that much anti-Jewish sentiment out there? I don't know. I was sort of hoping we were past that kind of thing. Before 2008, we had never had a black president. before 2020 we had never had a woman or non white VP. before 2020, we had also had only 1 catholic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
So which states have this big anti-Jewish sentiment? Any ogf the normal blue states? is New Jersey less likely to be blue with a Jewish guy on the ticket? How about, Conneticut, Virginia, California, Colorado (who has a gay Governor), or Washington State? Is a Jewish guy on the ticket a problem in any of these states?
Pa a major swing state elected this particular Jewish guy to statewide office 3 different times, including Governor, so I don't see a problem there. What about Wisconsin? Is there some large anti_jewish movement there I am not aware of? About the only state I can think of that there could be a problem is Michigan because they have a larger Arab population. But even that is only 2.1% of the total population.
IF, picking Shapiro helped Pa, but hurt in Michigan, they probably wouldn't do it. They will conduct some targeted polling to try to figure that out. She probably wont make the pick until next week, so there is a little time.
Still no VP lines on my sites, and I don't expect there will be as there were none, last week with the republicans. But if a line shows up and Shapiro is decent + money, I will put a little on it.
And yes, there could be some deep redneck states where it might matter. Dems aren't going to win those states anyway.
I wouldn't be afraid to pick Shapiro, if he is the best candidate and helps in targeted areas.
Plus it would be fun to hear all the conspiracy theories about how Harris's Jewish husband is calling the shots. :D.
So the first 2 days of the Harris candidacy and the republican response has been interesting. It is being reported that Trump and the republicans were totally blind-sided by this switch. Not sure why, since this has been discussed and ballyed around for a month now. :confused:
But anyway, their initial response has been to attack Harris on her sex and race, saying things like she got where she is by being black and sleeping around. :rolleyes: Not really surprising, but totally stupid.
The republicans biggest problem is women, particularly suburban woman. Do they think that is going to get better by attacking a woman for being a woman and saying things like "she slept her way to the top". :D
Additionally, the republicans according to polls, have made some inroads with black support. Yeah attack a candidate based on race. Smart move. That support they worked hard to gain, will dry up like water in Death Valley.
There are plenty of things they can attack Harris on. Policy things. I just don't know if THIS republican party and THIS candidate is capable of doing that and steering clear of the personal attacks. We will see if there is anyone with some brains left over there. :D
maybe not a great deal, but if it's 5% - one out of 20 - hey, that's 5% of the vote that may turn awayQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
or more likely decide not to vote at all -
Bernie Sanders who was Jewish was totally crushed by Biden in 2020 in the Democratic Primary
you don't really believe that Biden was all that much better than Bernie as a candidate do you____?
a Jewish person has never been chosen as VP - that's not due to randomness
look how much shit you take here for being outside of the mainstream in certain ways
anybody who thinks that America is one big happy diverse family of people is really just dreaming
Kamala is a candidate with non majority ethnicity - she would be crazy to double down on that
.
I don't think Bernie Sanders problem (as to why he can't win) is because he is Jewish. It is because he is WAY, WAY to far to the left. basically "socialist" left. Elizabeth Warren had the same problem and she isn't Jewish, so that isn't it and it wasn't because Bernie is/was Jewish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smokemaybe not a great deal, but if it's 5% - one out of 20 - hey, that's 5% of the vote that may turn awayQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
or more likely decide not to vote at all -
Bernie Sanders who was Jewish was totally crushed by Biden in 2020 in the Democratic Primary
you don't really believe Biden was all that much better than Bernie as a candidate do you____?
a Jewish person has never been chosen as VP - that's not due to randomness
anybody who thinks that America is one big happy diverse family of people is really just dreaming
Kamala is a candidate with non majority ethnicity - she would be crazy to double down on that
.
never mind BernieQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI don't think Bernie Sanders problem (as to why he can't win) is because he is Jewish. It is because he is WAY, WAY to far to the left. basically "socialist" left. Elizabeth Warren had the same problem and she isn't Jewish, so that isn't it and it wasn't because Bernie is/was Jewish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smokemaybe not a great deal, but if it's 5% - one out of 20 - hey, that's 5% of the vote that may turn awayQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
or more likely decide not to vote at all -
Bernie Sanders who was Jewish was totally crushed by Biden in 2020 in the Democratic Primary
you don't really believe Biden was all that much better than Bernie as a candidate do you____?
a Jewish person has never been chosen as VP - that's not due to randomness
anybody who thinks that America is one big happy diverse family of people is really just dreaming
Kamala is a candidate with non majority ethnicity - she would be crazy to double down on that
.
you're just wrong - plain wrong
one more time - her pick will be a white Christian male
if I was a betting man, which I'm not - I would give you 35/1 that the person she chooses will not be Jewish
I don't think you're Jewish. I am. I think I know things about this that you don't
you take all kinds of shit on this site because you're gay
do you really believe that there aren't all kinds of similar negative feelings out there about Jews that are not usually verbalized because a great many want to appear politically correct_____?
and on boards like this people don't generally know who is Jewish and who is not - that's why you don't hear much about it
.
You seem to be getting agitated by this discussion. Not sure why. And maybe you are right. Time will tell.
With regards to your 35-1 odds, just curious in June of 2020 what odds you would have given that an Indian Woman with a Black father and Jewish husband, would become the VP pick? :D
there's a great big differenceQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Joe Biden is a white Christian male
his pick wasn't a double down
.
I am confused as to how Harris picking Shapiro would be "doubling down"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
If she picked another woman like Witmer, THAT would be doubling down.
If she picked another minority black person, male or female, THAT would be doubling down.
But Harris an Indian/black woman, who was raised both Baptist (isn't that Christian) and Hindu, but as an adult described her religion as Baptist and was sworn in both the Senate and Vp using a "family Bible", picking a jewish man....how is that doubling down?
Are you suggesting she is not Christian?
come on Man - I'm getting tired - this post will be the last from me on the subject - you get the last wordQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI am confused as to how Harris picking Shapiro would be "doubling down"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
If she picked another woman like Witmer, THAT would be doubling down.
If she picked another minority black person, male or female, THAT would be doubling down.
But Harris an Indian/black woman, who was raised both Baptist (isn't that Christian) and Hindu, but as an adult described her religion as Baptist and was sworn in both the Senate and Vp using a "family Bible", picking a jewish man....how is that doubling down?
Are you suggesting she is not Christian?
she would be doubling down because it would be that both the Presidential Candidate and the Vice Presidential Candidate are not from the mainstream which is what much of the public is comfortable with
the mainstream - white Christian males
one out of the two out of the mainstream is okay - but both out of the mainstream - no way - not right now
it's quite amazing to me that you have such belief in the wonderful humanity and openness to change of human beings when you take so much shit here because of your choices
do you think it was just a coincidence that Obama chose a white Christian male to be his VP___________?
or maybe you would like to think that we've come a very long way since 2008
Edit - actually what I think it is KJ, is that I clearly showed you that you were wrong - and you don't like to be shown that you're wrong - you're very proud -
it's okay - we're still good - no problem at all_______________-:)
.
.
I thought You quit VCT?Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI am confused as to how Harris picking Shapiro would be "doubling down"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
If she picked another woman like Witmer, THAT would be doubling down.
If she picked another minority black person, male or female, THAT would be doubling down.
But Harris an Indian/black woman, who was raised both Baptist (isn't that Christian) and Hindu, but as an adult described her religion as Baptist and was sworn in both the Senate and Vp using a "family Bible", picking a jewish man....how is that doubling down?
Are you suggesting she is not Christian?
Was that not the point of your "THE END" thread?
In a debate she will kackle Trump to death.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
In 1789 the founding fathers had to get 13 colonies agree to a constitution. Popular vote would mean Virginia and New York would dominate the new country. The smaller colonies would not agree to such domination so would not join the Union. So a house based on population and a senate where each state has two votes was the compromise. The electoral college is 538 votes, the exact number of members of Congress.
This insures the minority has a voice. It's the same today and it will never change since it would take 38 states to ratify a change. So forget it and move on to other things.
This is all well and good mickeycrimm. I like that we have two separate houses, one that yields a little more power to the small states or populations. I think that is fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
But the electoral college is something different. I get that the number is derived from the combination number of house and senate representative. But here is the thing. Doesn't the term democracy have some relationship to majority, when picking a leader?
We have now had 2 elections in the last 6 that the person that received the most votes did not win? And a third in 2020, that despite a pretty overwhelming majority of 7 million, the election was only a few thousnad votes from doing so.
So is that really democracy? The person will the most votes routinely doesn't win now? :confused: It reminds me of South Africa where a very minority group managed to cling to power for much longer than they should have.
Now you are correct that the remedy, 38 states is not going to happen. especially in this climate. But mark my words, there will be a point that it flows the other way. the Democrats will narrowly win a few large states and all those electoral votes, while the Republicans win more widely win many more states and the popular vote, but lose the electoral college. If Texas ever flips blue as predicted (for a while now), watch out. this scenario becomes likely.
But guess what, it still wont get fixed because then the democrats won't want to. ;) In the meantime we have election after election that a very small number of people in about 6-7 mostly small-ish states decide the election. 90% of the people in this country, inclduing yourself in Montana, really don't need to bother voting. It isn't going to mean anything. the only votes that count are Joe Smoe and Nancy smith, in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Social security cola and inflation:
To hear the republicans talk, inflation is through the roof. That is one of their talking points vs Biden and now Harris. So I figured all you good folks on SS on this forum would be getting a healthy "bump" (cola) come January.
But just saw on the news that the SS cola projection is between 2.4 and 2.6%, as there is still a couple months until an exact projection.
2.4-2.6% vs "through the roof". Seems like somebody isn't telling the truth!! :D
Now speaking of S.S., I just have figured for a long time that I will never see a dime. I am making my own arrangements for retirement, which don't include mooching off anyone. But last year, my financial guy informed me that at age 50, I am eligible to collect 100% of my late spouse's social security. Normally it is 60, but if the person was disabled it is 50 for some reason.
I haven't really looked into it, but the funny thing is, the timing looks like I might be eleigible just about the time SS is due to run dry. :D
The founding fathers deliberately avoided setting up a democracy and went with a constitutional republic. You need to remove the word democracy from your vocabulary. It does not apply to the United States.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJThis is all well and good mickeycrimm. I like that we have two separate houses, one that yields a little more power to the small states or populations. I think that is fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
But the electoral college is something different. I get that the number is derived from the combination number of house and senate representative. But here is the thing. Doesn't the term democracy have some relationship to majority, when picking a leader?
We have now had 2 elections in the last 6 that the person that received the most votes did not win? And a third in 2020, that despite a pretty overwhelming majority of 7 million, the election was only a few thousnad votes from doing so.
So is that really democracy? The person will the most votes routinely doesn't win now? :confused: It reminds me of South Africa where a very minority group managed to cling to power for much longer than they should have.
Now you are correct that the remedy, 38 states is not going to happen. especially in this climate. But mark my words, there will be a point that it flows the other way. the Democrats will narrowly win a few large states and all those electoral votes, while the Republicans win more widely win many more states and the popular vote, but lose the electoral college. If Texas ever flips blue as predicted (for a while now), watch out. this scenario becomes likely.
But guess what, it still wont get fixed because then the democrats won't want to. ;) In the meantime we have election after election that a very small number of people in about 6-7 mostly small-ish states decide the election. 90% of the people in this country, inclduing yourself in Montana, really don't need to bother voting. It isn't going to mean anything. the only votes that count are Joe Smoe and Nancy smith, in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Presidential elections are decided by all 50 states. Remove cali or ny from Biden’s electoral count and he would have lost.
Impossible for SS to run dry as long as people pay into it. Only cuts can be made but there will be a political fix. To big a voting bloc.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Prices are up 25% since 2021. The widget cost $100 in 2021. It’s $125 in 2024. And still going up at the current inflation rate of 3.5%. So by next year the widget will be $130.
There's a question to ponder when evaluating a woman's chance to become president: "Do I want to fuck her?"
If so, she's out; if not, she's eligible.
I was out last night having a few brewskys at a watering hole. Of course with the current news cycle, the topic of politics came up. One guy suggested that if Harris leaps Trump in the polls, which he believes is coming very shortly, Trump will dump JD Vance, who has been a disaster. I agreed as I have also been thinking that. Repubs already have a big problem and deficit with women voters. Started with the Dobbs decision. Trump being convicted of sexual assault only made that worse. And now Mr JD Vance for 10 days now has said one insulting thing and previously said theories and statements come to light every day. There just isn't enough white males to overcome the hole they are digging with women. :D
So yesterday, I was actually thinking of what woman Trump would replace Vance with. Of course Nicky Haley immediately comes to mind. But I don't think Trump would go there. (he probably should). He will not be able to bring himself to forgive her for things said this spring in the primaries and ask her for help on top of it. THAT is just not Trump.
The Margorie Tayler Green and Bobarts are a no go. They are just too crazy. The female Governor that wrote about shooting her dog is out. She was in the hunt for a long time, but shooting poor fido, sealed her fate. I was thinking about the Stephonic congress person from New York, but really outside of hard core political junkies, does anyone even know who the fuck she is?
So this guy at the bar came up with someone I hadn''t considered. Sarah Hucklebee Sanders. Now Governor of Arkansas. Interesting! Not sure she would do it though. I think her plan is to finsh her term as Govenor and then run for President in 2028. She rose to fame with Trump as his spokesman, but not sure she would want to go back and tie herself to him completely again.
Anyway we will see. Any kind of change like this would have to occur before August 7, after that, you wouldn't be allowed on Ohio ballot. And if Trumps VP wasn't on the ballot in Ohio, some might think big deal, but that could very well lead to a situation where Trump wins the presidency and the democratic VP wins the vice presidency, which I don't know has ever happened.
Gotta love this political election season. All kind of possibilities we haven't seen before. :rolleyes:
UNKewlJ trying to act like he could ever just be one of the boys. He's been an outcast since his own family booted him right out! The most intimate interaction he could ever have with his fellow man would be a fistfight, which - that's right, he already did wind up with a shiner from one of his disgruntled Johns just the other week!
https://i.imgur.com/Q60P2XMm.jpg
Aww, that is so cute. You stalk me around hijackng every thread. Obsess much?
Trump won't pick Haley...not after the "betrayal" by Pence.
No, he needs a loyal lap dog, male or female, and he knows she'd always be waiting in the wings, ready to stab him in the back when the right moment arrives.
I don't see him picking a woman...unless he picks her up by the pussy.
Trump dumping Vance now would give Harris's campaign too much material with which to shred Trump as flaky, indecisive, and incapable of surrounding himself with the right people.
I agree with that to a point. BUT, they have to TRY to do something about this woman voter problem. It is getting to the point that their just aren't enough white male voter to offset the hole they are currently in.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Plus, Donald has a long history of throwing people around him under the bus, dating back long before he got into politics. he demands loyalty, but never returns it.
US Forecaster Who Predicted Trump's 2016 Victory Says Kamala Harris Will Win November Election
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world...on/ar-BB1qRhC4
Hard to argue with a guy that predicted 2 50/50 shots correctly in the past 8 years, but it’s funny the article left out that he predicted the 2000 election wrong & he predicted Trump would win the popular vote in 2016.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
The reason that I included a prediction by the anagrams with gematria, at https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post181585 .Quote:
Originally Posted by DGenBenHard to argue with a guy that predicted 2 50/50 shots correctly in the past 8 years, but it’s funny the article left out that he predicted the 2000 election wrong & he predicted Trump would win the popular vote in 2016.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
I guess that I must have thus known that someone would question it.