The 2024 Presidential Race Thread

[UnionStrong]

“What they're saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the House Oversight Committee ranking member and former Jan. 6 committee member who objected to Trump electors in 2017, told Axios in an interview that if Trump "won a free, fair and honest election, then we would obviously accept it."

• However, Raskin said he "definitely" doesn't assume that Trump would use free, fair and honest means to secure a victory.
• Trump "is doing whatever he can to try to interfere with the process, whether we're talking about manipulating electoral college counts in Nebraska or manipulating the vote count in Georgia or imposing other kinds of impediments," Raskin said.”

Raskin is a scumbag

 

[Next Day Err]

So is your answer yes or no?

There won’t be a problem when both sides play by the rules. The Dems will certify if and when Trump wins the most electoral college votes.

 

[Doublestandards]

There won’t be a problem when both sides play by the rules. The Dems will certify if and when Trump wins the most electoral college votes.

“and when”? You switch to the other side, traitor?!?

 

[Box Ox]

There won’t be a problem when both sides play by the rules. The Dems will certify if and when Trump wins the most electoral college votes.

Why would they do that without a fight if they truly believe Trump will send the military after his political enemies upon entering office?

 

[Doublestandards]

Well, Democrats are saying the exact same thing Donald Trump said, they’ll certify it as long as they think it’s legitimate lol

Well trump one once and they certified, Trump lost once and they overran the capitol and threatened to hang mike pence lol

“What they're saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the House Oversight Committee ranking member and former Jan. 6 committee member who objected to Trump electors in 2017, told Axios in an interview that if Trump "won a free, fair and honest election, then we would obviously accept it."

• However, Raskin said he "definitely" doesn't assume that Trump would use free, fair and honest means to secure a victory.
• Trump "is doing whatever he can to try to interfere with the process, whether we're talking about manipulating electoral college counts in Nebraska or manipulating the vote count in Georgia or imposing other kinds of impediments," Raskin said.”

Yeah that’s a stupid, disapointing statement. But I mean, if Trump succeeded in getting Georgia to “find” extra votes like he wanted, that shouldn’t be certified, because it’s fraudulent. The difference is that there was no evidence of fraudulence when Trump tried to not certify, and his own team told him so, and so did the courts

 

[Next Day Err]

“and when”? You switch to the other side, traitor?!?

Trump has a good shot at winning.

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

“and when”? You switch to the other side, traitor?!?

The betting markets are giving Trump a 64% chance of winning.

 

[Doublestandards]

Why would they do that without a fight if they truly believe Trump will send the military after his political enemies upon entering office?

Two wrongs don’t make a right

 

[Next Day Err]

Why would they do that without a fight if they truly believe Trump will send the military after his political enemies upon entering office?

Because the Dems are going to follow the law.

 

[Doublestandards]

The betting markets are giving Trump a 64% chance of winning.

I read that there are 3 or 4 major payers who put money in that skewed the market

But regardless, last I checked Trump was slightly leading most of the critical swing states, so he definitely has a very good chance of winning

 

[Doublestandards]

Trump has a good shot at winning.

Very much so, it’s not guaranteed though. Just keep it at “if” please lol

 

[Box Ox]

Trump invoked Rep. Adam Schiff as one person he might use the military against.

There won’t be a problem when both sides play by the rules. The Dems will certify if and when Trump wins the most electoral college votes.

Why would they do that without a fight if they truly believe Trump will send the military after his political enemies upon entering office?

Because the Dems are going to follow the law.

Democrats truly believe Trump will send the military after his political opponents and their main concern while certifying his election win would be following the law?

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

I read that there are 3 or 4 major payers who put money in that skewed the market

But regardless, last I checked Trump was slightly leading most of the critical swing states, so he definitely has a very good chance of winning

Polymarket has 2.4 billion USD in volume on that particular pool.

I’d love to know more about these 3 or 4 players if you have anything to back that claim up.

 

[Next Day Err]

Democrats truly believe Trump will send the military after his political opponents and their main concern while certifying his election win would be following the law?

Yes.

 

[Doublestandards]

Democrats truly believe Trump will send the military after his political opponents and their main concern while certifying his election win would be following the law?

I mean, yeah, that’s how it should be

A lot of republicans are saying the same type of rhetoric about if Harris wins. That it will destroy our country and that she’s going after political opponents. We still need the republicans who respect the law to do what’s right, even if we disagree politically

 

[Doublestandards]

Polymarket has 2.4 billion USD in volume on that particular pool.

I’d love to know more about these 3 or 4 players if you have anything to back that claim up.

What to know about the potential $30 million whale moving betting markets toward Trump

Four Polymarket accounts that appear to be connected have bet $30 million that Trump will win the election, according to Arkham Intelligence.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

What to know about the potential $30 million whale moving betting markets toward Trump

Four Polymarket accounts that appear to be connected have bet $30 million that Trump will win the election, according to Arkham Intelligence.

www.businessinsider.com

That’s 1.25% of the volume.

I really don’t see how you think that would manipulate the odds so drastically.

 

[Darmark7]

Your answer must be that you would be ok with democrats doing it right? Since it was ok for Trump to try to do it?

I have no problem with it but anyone that tries and anyone in the vicinity of anyone trying should be sent to prison with no due process and no day in court. You would be OK with that right?

 

[Next Day Err]

I don’t know if the military will follow the president’s orders to be deployed against Americans but I have no doubt that President Trump will want them to do so. We know this because it’s been reported that he wanted the military to shoot protestors back in his first term. He sees the military as he own private law enforcement. He’s a megalomaniacal monster.

 

[Doublestandards]

That’s 1.25% of the volume.

I really don’t see how you think that would manipulate the odds so drastically.

You’re probably right then, I didn’t look too much in to it. Like I said trump is slightly leading in swing states so he has a very good chance of winning