The DEBATES are Coming! 3 Pres.& 1 VP debate Scheduled

I believe he will be fair and balanced. He's no Shaun Hannity. I have found myself mad at Chris Wallace but I have heard him corner leftists and watched them get mad.

Now if Biden can only remember it's "Chris" not "Chuck"!........
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...3BFA2C37CD4089767E7D3BF&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

We must, however, verify that Chris does not share questions with Sleepy Joe prior to the debate as Donna Brazil did with Hillary.

 

You and I both... not desperate, quite the opposite - my job is boooring

 

The 2nd, BETTOR ASSESSMENTS-- now shorter & less, "dry!"

Going by the over/unders for Trump, professional bookmakers don't seem to be expecting the President, at this point, to be going directly at Biden, personally, very much. Instead, their word-choices depict Trump more as defending/deflecting/& blaming or scapegoating others.

To wit: the highest Trump over/under is 6.5 times, for the word, "China," (though, granted, Trump does seem to enjoy enunciating that word). "Antifa," comes in next at 4.5, followed by, "law & order," &, "Obama," both at 3.5. The city-names, "Portland," and,"Seattle," have been pegged at only 1.5 times, w/ the payouts skewed towards anticipating Portland to more likely be, "over," & Seattle more likely, "under."

On that score, I found it interesting that one of the offshore books has odds already on who CNN & FOX will say won the debate! For Fox News, Trump is the favorite-- $400 will only win you $100, if that's who Fox names the winner-- and Biden the underdog ($100 will win you $250). And the inevitability is even greater, by the odds, with CNN: You'll need to bet $1200 on Biden in order to win $100, if that's CNNs declared victor, and will get back $550 if you correctly put down $100 on Trump as their winner.

 

The only thing that worries me about the debate is that Joe has a bad dementia day and Trump beats him mercilessly and engenders sympathy for Biden.

 

Sympathy for someone not qualified to run the free world? It should instantly force him to drop out and force Dems to run Kamala now instead their plan all along, which was for Biden to retire after a year.

 

bad police are bad and they are also criminals

do you think bad police are good?

good police are good, most police are good, bad police make the news more though

 

Biden needs to ignore the personal attacks from Trump and stay on policy, Trump is a bully, that is what Trump knows

 

Trump --> extensive list of astonishingly exemplar accomplishments in the last x 47 mo... good fodder for another post

Biden --> Paltry... & perhaps "actionable" quid pro quo / hasn't been all that consequential or 'outstanding' in his x 40ish Years in Congress - or as VP for the remainder... (imho)

(Sorry I know most of y'all have seen this...) 2 min. in btw.

 

Question to ask Uncle Joe........ You say you won't tax ANYONE making under $400,000. You also say you are undoing Trump's tax cuts. What is that.....magic? Those tax cuts saved middle income earners thousands. So in essence you are raising their taxes. You are also talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Are you going to end fracking or not?

When will we see that list of Scotus nominees you promised?......or are you afraid they might be too "right" for the squad? Or too "left" for the average citizen? Playing your cards close to your chest there?

 

No Trumps not a bully. Leftists are so used to pounding gentlemen like Juan McCain and Smitten Romney.......they wet their pants when a counter puncher gets into the ring!
The only reason Trump is famous for his "tweets" is because it is his way of getting around the Marxist enthralled media and getting his messages 1st hand to the citizens. Actually it has been ingenious. Love seeing him calling out CNN and NBC live, then they turn off their cameras. Can't take a punch!

 

Trump is a bully with a very fragile ego

 

"What....are you a junky or something"? "Com'on man!" "Take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him". "lyin dogfaced pony soldier"
Sounds like you meant to say Biden.

 

Nice gambling reference. But if you thought I was doing anything other than trying to read the debate's betting-line tea leaves to figure out what those handicappers might be thinking, then you were mistaken. From the limited number, so far, of over/under prop bets I've found on Trump-- all of which I listed: China-6.5; Antifa-4.5; law & order-3.5; Obama-3.5; Portland & Seattle- only 1.5 each-- that looks to me like those bookmakers are not expecting Trump to go after, e.g., Biden-family corruption. Why do I come to that conclusion? Because, "Burisma," "Hunter Biden," etc., are not on the list. Nor is, "fracking," or, "tax cuts," to take a couple from your list.

Might the odds-makers be totally wrong-- of course! Might I have misinterpreted their thinking-- sure. But I think my reading is at least compatible w/ their over/unders (i.e., that they could be expecting Trump to blame China for the Covid-19 situation, & Antifa for all the unrest & lack of, "law & order" in the cities, which he would promise to restore by cracking down on them). If, looking at those terms, in those proportions, conjures a different scenario to your mind, I'd surely like to hear it because, until now, both of my posts from that angle have been completely ignored by all.

It seems to me, though, that all you are doing is suggesting some avenues of attack that you feel would be productive for, & available to, President Trump; and that is certainly appropriate material for this thread. I just don't see any reason to believe that it is the view of gambling professionals, & so I don't know why mine was the post you chose to reply to with your list (which is not really related to my post). I guess I'll just take it as a sign that you like reading my responses, or something along those friendly lines. Till next time-- don't let any alligators eat the grandkids, or something worse!

 

Anybody notice that Trump is lowering expectations?

'He's got 47 years, I've got 3 1/2'

I am looking forward to the post debate discussion..

 

I have no desire to offend. I do not view the race as objective as in the eyes of a gambler. As a citizen, I am too personally involved. I do not wish to see the country fall into the hands of those who would radically change it's "founding". As far as odds go, I do believe in a "divine hand" as did President Washington and I believe miracles happen.
We are foolish to think we have things under our control in this world.My mistake and apologies.

 

No offense taken, yabberefugee. Just a misunderstanding, which I think may still persist.To quote from my post #47, in which I began examining this particular predictive art (odds-making) in relation to the upcoming debate:

I'd like to start by saying I am NOT
trying to encourage anyone to bet, but only think it's worthwhile to canvas the opinion of people who are not being swayed by any political sympathies; who are making predictions with only their financial interests in mind.

That's all I was doing. Essentially, just getting the betting community's opinion, as far as I could read it, about what we might expect to happen Tuesday. Ultimately, of course, it doesn't matter the source for any prediction: what will be, will be. But that attitude kind of depletes the well of things to post.

Hope you have a great Sunday & I'm sure we'll swap ideas again, soon.

 

The left has been "radically changing" our founding for decades.

RBG didn't hide her contempt for the Constitution, and the activists judges on the SC and lower courts deliberately misinterpret and apply, or not apply, the Constitution.

The ends justifies the means.

Antonio Gramsci was right, and now 80 some years after his death, the left's takeover of our institutions has us on the brink of collapse.

From the standpoint of the left, including the Democratic Party, the death of America is a good thing.

 

No, not 40 years in Congress. 180 years in Congress

 

But not before Democrats' talking points comes in, right?

 

Trump is the President who sat in 3 Conservative SCOTUS Justices.

Deal with it

 

And if they're closed?

 

If they're closed, that's Jr. coming down off the coke.

 

I've never paid a bit attention to the debates. All I'm looking for is someone who can govern competently. Being a good debater has nothing at all to do with one's ability to govern. Being a good debater doesn't even make my list of 100.

Most of those who tune into the debates have a horse in this race. Swing Voters or those non-affiliated aren't all that interested. 56% of independents say they aren't going to watch compared to 23% of democrats and 21% of Republicans. Besides, come the next day Republicans will be saying their candidate won, the Democrats saying their's won. 80% or perhaps a bit more who watch the debates are party loyalist, avid supporters of the two major party candidates. The ones who haven't made up their minds yet, most won't watch. When was the last time the debates influenced an election? 1960 for sure and perhaps in 1980 with Reagan's last remark or question, "Are you better off today, than you were 4 years ago?"

Reagan's lead was 3 points prior and won the election by 10. But no one remembers a single thing about that debate other than Reagan's final question. Those two debates, 1960 and 1980 are the only two I know of that may have influenced the election results. The rest, a total waste of time as being a good debater has zero effect on how one govern's, whether competently or not.

 

I disagree. It means, the sleepy Joe has fallen into his natural state.

 

They will simply stuff it up his rump and trust to volume control to make contact with whatever remains of Joe's mind.