After all the wacky and clueless ways in which the election betting market has swung these past few days, can we finally admit that most of the people who bet money on elections don’t tend to know shit about elections?
For example, people started betting huge on Trump late on Tuesday night, under the mistaken belief that he was ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin. But anyone paying proper attention would have known this wasn't the case.
Sports bettings odds tend to pan out, because the people who bet on sports games tend to follow and understand that sport really well. But with election betting, we're very clearly seeing that's not the case.
For months in general, and for days in particular, people have been flooding me with election betting market shifts, and I can't think of a data point that's less relevant. As bad as the polls were, the betting odds were even more laughable.
On the other hand I'd imagine that if you actually follow politics closely, you could do quite well betting on elections, since most of the other bettors are clueless and mistakenly driving the betting odds in your favor.
This isn't betting advice. Disclaimer blah blah blah.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When major news outlets screw up and everyone gets pissed, they actually take it as point of pride. They think their unwillingness to fix it proves they’re not vulnerable to outside pressure.
It never even occurs to them that they might just be wrong.
Call the damn election.
The irony: the media IS responding to outside pressure. Going into this we demanded they not prematurely call it for Trump during the red mirage, and not let Trump call it for himself. Which they obliged. But now they’re afraid to call it for the actual winner.
It’s like training your dog not shit on the carpet, and the lesson your dog learns is that it shouldn’t ever take a shit again. And when you urge it to take a shit outside instead, it refuses to, and is proud of it.
We've now reached the point where even the on-air personalities on CNN and MSNBC are starting to grumble out loud about the absurdity of their networks not calling the results. This is a farce.
It's been my observation that MSNBC and CNN are remarkably far removed from reality when it comes to what they think makes them look good. Even with their primary goal being ratings, they cost themselves ratings with a tone deaf approach.
For instance, CNN still thinks it can get higher ratings by having one Trump apologist on each panel, even though no Trump fan is going to watch CNN no matter what. MSNBC still thinks "both sides" narratives make it look balanced.
I have zero interest in Trump's legal challenges. At these margins he has zero chance of litigating enough ballots to flip any states that would get him to 270. The litigation narrative is just cable news filler while we await more vote totals.
As I said before election day, Trump's only chance of litigating his way to victory would have been if the deciding state came down to a few hundred votes, like in the 2000 election. That's just not happening this time.
Even in the VERY VERY VERY unlikely scenario where Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona all come down to a few hundred votes, and he manages to flip them all in court, he still wouldn't be at 270. Next closest state for him would be Wisconsin, where he lost by 30,000 votes. Game over.
For those asking: if the Democrats win both Georgia runoffs, the Senate would be 50-50. Because VP Kamala Harris would be the tiebreaker on all matters, the Democrats would have the "majority." Schumer not McConnell would be Senate Majority Leader. It's pretty straightforward.
To be clear, Democrat Cal Cunningham hasn't officially lost in North Carolina yet, and Democrat-aligned Independent Al Gross in Alaska says he thinks he still has a shot at winning.
The above runoff math is based on Cunningham and Gross both losing.
This is in response to everyone flooding me with "what if it ends up 50-50" questions. That's always a straightforward matter of which party controls the White House.
I'm not saying winning both runoffs will be easy. But we have to try. It's for all the marbles.
The fatalists insisted we'd lose. They're being proven wrong, because they're always wrong (fatalists never look at the evidence). Now that Biden is going to win, the fatalists will insist that Trump will somehow just magically remain in office. They'll be wrong about that too.
It's fine to be an optimist or a pessimist, so long as you're basing it on the evidence.
But FATALISTS just make up unlikely or impossible doomsday scenarios in their heads, then insist (without evidence) that the scenarios will absolutely happen. That's a psychological defect.
The fatalists within our ranks have cost us many, many elections over the years, because they convince the rest of us not to bother fighting or trying. I don't intend to let the fatalists cost us an election ever again.
We all knew Arizona was going to tighten at the end. But I haven't seen anything tonight to suggest that Trump can somehow take it back. Biden campaign keeps making clear to the media that it fully expects to win Arizona.
In the unlikely event that Trump somehow wins Arizona:
- If Biden then hangs on in Nevada as expected, Biden would also need to win either Pennsylvania or Georgia.
- Pennsylvania looks likely for Biden. Georgia is anyone's guess.
In other words, Biden doesn't need Arizona.
I suspect MSNBC and CNN are just trying to use Arizona to keep us tuned in tonight. We'll see.