On the point of Obama being a moderate in the current field he would be but it's worth noting that it's 12 years after he started running for President and the political climate changes a lot in that time, that's almost half a generation ago. If he was running for the first time in 2020 i'd wager he'd have a lot of different positions including insisting on at least a public option (granted he tried but Lieberman killed it) and being pro gay marriage among other things. I'd assume he'd be in favour of legalising weed in 2020 as well and probably a bunch of other progressive stuff that was 'electoral suicide' 12 years ago but isn't anymore

He's certainly to the left of where Biden 'naturally' stands politically and to the right of Bernie and Warren, it's a bit more debatable about where he'd stand if he was running this cycle relative to say Buttigieg or Warren or the people who are somewhere in the middle of the current D field ideologically

It has nothing to do with whether the posts leaned left or right you imbecile. Next tell us how much you love the Jets and why they're the best team to be a fan of or some ****. No one cares about your political or sports opinion on this forum. There's an entire forum for you to talk about why you like Candidate X or Y right here: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...itics-society/

Now **** off and leave the adults to talk about gambling on the election.

The first part makes sense to me. I probably have a massive blind spot for boomer liberals, as I just about never interact with such people. So it's very possible that among this mostly invisible (to me) demographic, Biden has appeal.

With that said, is it really plausible that moderates will perceive Biden and his service under Obama as "a time when we didn't hate each other so much?" I'm not sure if this is accurate or not, but I have the perception that it was during Obama's presidency that a lot of the really divisive issues blew up. Trannies using the other sex's bathroom, black lives matter violently protesting, tension between poor neighbourhoods and the police escalating, and other identity politics topics widening the gap between left and right. Certainly Trump's presidency has done nothing to stem the tide of this division, but it seems that his popularity is in large part due to him seizing upon this anger and division which was already present, and playing it up to generate a passionate base of voters who felt their values were being trampled on during Obama's presidency. That is, Trump simply fanned the flames; he didn't start the fire.

I don't think we saw anything like that during Bush or Clinton's terms. The Iraq War was of course polarising and controversial, but it wasn't as personal as the identity politics issues that came to fester during Obama's reign. The identity politics stuff is what created that anger and hatred, it seems. I could see right-leaning moderates blaming Biden for part of that and thus not associating him with "a time when we didn't hate each other so much."

If you want to argue that Dem voters are looking for a more moderate candidate who isn't going to turn off voters with polarising rhetoric, Yang and Gabbard seem like they'd be more popular. Almost everyone can get on board with "Wars are expensive and stupid, corporations are screwing you and politicians are corrupt; let's use all that money for something better." It's not a new message, but when Yang and Gabbard say it, it seems more likely they actually believe it, compared to your average scumbag thief politician.

But, obviously that's not what we're seeing. Perhaps Biden is more appealing to boomers as they see younger candidates as too inexperienced, and can relate to Biden's mind slowing down, and are more forgiving of that.

Is there a good source to view how candidates are polling across different demographics? Would be interesting to see among whom Biden is most popular.

I think one thing being lost in here is that I dont think theres honestly too many people out there who don't follow politics, or at the very least, feel passionate one way or the other. Lots of people may say they stay out or dont want to talk about it but if you press them on it youll find that theyre almost always pretty passionate one way or the other. People either hate trump or hate the people that hate trump. Politics today is like nothing Ive ever seen before...there is no more middle. Everyone has to pick a side. I have my opinions on who will win and why but dont have much confidence in them. If theres any bet Im interested in right now Id look for overs on turnouts.

I take it you guys didn't watch her in the Democrat debates? Because I never would have imagined anyone thinking that.

(Granted the debates were complete **** shows and painful to sit through, but I did it mostly for the lulz.)

FYI idk if most 2p2ers know this but the 2p2 Politics forum has recently undergone a major upheaval whereby most of the quality/sane posters moved to a site called Unstuck Politics that a few of them recently built. New posters/lurkers welcome.

Hedgie, I thank you for your feedback. It is always enlightening to engage with an “adult in the room” as rational and calculated as yourself. It seems that my post may have struck a nerve, I offer my apologies if this is the case. Though I would caution that emotional responses aren’t going to provide you much value in this arena. If you are unable to regulate your emotional responses a little better, then I recommend you sit this one out. You (and your wallet) will thank me later.

Based on the above statement, it’s not entirely clear to me that you have read anything I have said in this thread. I have indicated that I am more than eager to listen to both sides. Regardless, everything I have written and read thus far (with the exception of your post) is information that I consider to be important and relevant to making bets and shorts. I have already posted a winning political prop. This is an area I am very interested in. It appears, based on the other posts, that many others have important insights too. Instead of trying to micromanage what constitutes an “opinion” that isn’t allowed, I would focus on listening to everyone’s insights and then drawing conclusions from there.

We’re headed towards to meat of the discussion in short order. I hope that you have more interesting and valuable contributions in the future.

Classic fade InfoWars spot

Clinton Indicted NO @ 91c

Even if guilty, she was able to pull it off so clearly able to avoid getting caught

https://www.predictit.org/markets/de...ember-31,-2019

I think this is even better. Comey at 16c

I will go on record is saying this my second official pick. Trump is a more rational actor then he gets credit for, this would legitimately tear the country apart.

Good call. A Trump supporter and a Bernie supporter working together to provide a living wage for everyone

Yeah both are super obvious fades I have no idea how people think they're 10% and 16% to face charges lol

Predictit has huge fees but these still net to probably 3% and 9% respectively. Still +EV in my opinion, especially since the contracts expire this year.

They net to 3% and 9% if you're depositing and withdrawing specifically for those bets. If you maintain a bankroll there, winning an 84% bet nets you 16% * 90% = 14.4%.

Thanks for clarifying.

this thread was pretty sweet until the report-a-post squad showed up and told us that we were GETTING. OFF. TOPIC.

Like, we can make this thread great again. We all know that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach.




So I am offering this proposal to my dear friend Hedgie. Hedgie, I think we should settle our differences over a little of the Lord's chicken. My proposal is this:

This post entitles Hedgie to one free Chick-Fil-A combo meal, good for this week only. Just write your name on the receipt and post it here and it will be taken care of courtesy of CodythePATRIOT via Venmo. My hope is that a little of the Lord's chicken will go a long way to healing the divisions not only in this thread but in our country.

YES! I WANT FREE FOOD TOO!

A lot can change between now and the final nomination. Remember that primaries skew less moderate than the general election. This time in 2015 Trump was polling at 1% while Jeb Bush held the lead at around 30%... yeah, things can change very quickly.

Yeah, Trump was also leading the polls the whole way. Prediction market traders just assumed he was a flavor-of-the-month like the 2012 clownshow (Perry, Cain, Bachmann, Santorum).

Anyway, there are plenty of no-hopers out there. Like, Kirsten Gillibrand and Steve Bullock are just not going to win the nomination. The country has seen them and ignored them, and they're done. The only long-shot I genuinely think could make it is Marianne Williamson, simply because she seems like the polar opposite of Trump, a complete outsider that speaks to the party id. I'm not long her or anything, I'm just not going to short her at 1% right now.

I already donated to the Williamson campaign. Good for the lolz and I feel that it provides me some sort of cosmic karma.

No doubt she'd get lots of black and female voters, but don't you think she'd scare away most of the moderates? I would imagine a lot of less spiritual and more logical people thinking she is a total nutjob.

Williamson is still a huge longshot, probably isn't even going to make the next round of the debates. I think parttimepro was just commenting that of all the candidates that are clearly not going to make it, she has the most underdog potential. I agree. Every post I have read by him is spot on so far. She has the memes working in her favor, which is important for modern candidates. She also has a decent swell of grass roots donors. She just isn't making a dent in the polls. Many (like me) enjoy watching her up there, but it hasn't translated into serious voting potential.

Hedgie and I are prepping for the election by re-reading The Case for Reparations by Ta-Nehisi Coates. Join us CodythePATRIOT. Then we can talk about it and make this forum great again (or do you feel it never was great?).

The author begins by wrapping himself in the cloak of the American tradition. From our Judeo-Christian roots to the founding, he follows a rich tradition of radical yet diverse figures such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ronald Reagan who attempted to transform America by appealing to its roots.

What Cody said, plus I actually don't think she'd get much support from black voters. Black folks have a complicated history with the Democratic party -- as a group, they're the most loyal supporters, but they often get promised a lot and then conveniently jettisoned once the election is over. Consequently they tend to stick with known entities who have had long relationships with the black community. Hell, it took Obama several months to take the lead over Hillary among black voters.

Williamson is a johnny-come-lately, and even if she were elected, her call for reparations would never happen. Similarly Buttigieg has little chance of winning because he never built ties with the South Bend black community. He's best known as the mayor with the racist police force, and there is no way he can overcome that in the next 5 months.

On the other hand, Biden, who has recently touted his collaboration decades ago with Senators who were open white supremacists, dominates the black vote because of his 8-year relationship with Obama.

Tom, weren't you the one who didn't want this thread getting derailed into personal political beliefs?