|
|
Obama will likely win this time, but the halo is gone.
He spent the entire campaign talking about petty issues, attacking Romney (some legit, some half truths, some outright bs), and really having no plan at all outside of "Romney sucks" and "Hey, remember how awesome you thought I was 4 years ago?"
No grand, lofty inspirational speeches. Just standard divide and conquer politics.
While Obama looks poised to win a 2nd term, the bloom is off the rose, the thrill is gone.
Never put your faith or trust in a politician. The state is a fundamentally flawed concept and is nothing more than well organized violence.
For all you wanna be Obama hipsters, please read this, it will blow your mind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
Of course most of you will be like "LOL, wut no gubment? But we have to have one!" because you've been brainwashed with that your whole life.
|
On November 06 2012 14:10 Zaqwert wrote:
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI.
I don't think you understand how ROI works. Hint, if you're not using the returns in your calculation it should be an obvious hint you're doing something wrong.
Edit: Eh, wouldn't have bothered responding if I'd read what you'd just posted LOL. What's to stop someone from walking around with a shotgun robbing people? Bodyguards? Should every person have a body guard, maybe the whole economy can have 0% unemployment, everyone can be some else's bodyguard.
|
On November 06 2012 14:12 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:42 oneofthem wrote:On November 06 2012 13:31 cLAN.Anax wrote:On November 06 2012 13:17 Souma wrote:
Guys, the fortune from the fortune cookie I just ate says, "A surprise will come from an unexpected source."
That doesn't sound good~ Third party upset? :-D *crosses fingers* Some of you might find this "poll" of sorts interesting. Friend of mine recommended it and it seems very unbiased and thorough. I suggest you give it a shot and post your results. I'll be posting mine in a sec. http://www.isidewith.com/#52574784 i wouldn't say it's thorough, but it gets the major issues and candidate positions well, so you are distinguished amongst the choices given. i'm probably a neoliberal imperialist to jill stein but i get her at 93% based on that platform. Lol, I'll be darned! I hadn't heard of Stein till tonight. Did a quick search of her and the first result was that she was arrested for something. Not the greatest first impression, haha! Got my own results back. Whoa. Holy... + Show Spoiler +O_O Uhh.... To be clear, I don't trust Romney on his stances. If he is elected, I think he would flip-flop on many things, so I only count this 90% to his "theoretical" or campaign stances, if you will. Surprised that Goode didn't get higher than Johnson for me here. Thought for sure I'd be more in line with the Constitutionalist party than the Libertarian one, but oh well.
It's pretty solid. I was 82 Johnson, 80 Romney and like 67 Obama.
|
On November 06 2012 14:20 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 14:10 Zaqwert wrote:
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI. I don't think you understand how ROI works. Hint, if you're not using the returns in your calculation it should be an obvious hint you're doing something wrong. Edit: Eh, wouldn't have bothered responding if I'd read what you'd just posted LOL. What's to stop someone from walking around with a shotgun robbing people? Bodyguards? Should every person have a body guard, maybe the whole economy can have 0% unemployment, everyone can be some else's bodyguard.
EV != ROI.
He's talking EV, even though he's saying ROI. He's right, just used the wrong term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value
Same theory used when you play pro poker.
|
On November 06 2012 14:20 Zaqwert wrote:Obama will likely win this time, but the halo is gone. He spent the entire campaign talking about petty issues, attacking Romney (some legit, some half truths, some outright bs), and really having no plan at all outside of "Romney sucks" and "Hey, remember how awesome you thought I was 4 years ago?" No grand, lofty inspirational speeches. Just standard divide and conquer politics. While Obama looks poised to win a 2nd term, the bloom is off the rose, the thrill is gone. Never put your faith or trust in a politician. The state is a fundamentally flawed concept and is nothing more than well organized violence. For all you wanna be Obama hipsters, please read this, it will blow your mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalismOf course most of you will be like "LOL, wut no gubment? But we have to have one!" because you've been brainwashed with that your whole life.
Well personally, I'm glad that you have an ideology that lets you feel like you're superior to everyone else. How I wish I could be not brainwashed like you, you magnificent specimen you.
|
next post responding to this post decides who I vote for in primary.
|
I said EXPECTED ROI.
Over the long run if you bet a 93% favorite and get it at a price of 66% your expected ROI will be 27%
|
On November 06 2012 14:27 puppykiller wrote:
next post responding to this post decides who I vote for in primary.
Primary is over dawg. Romney already won it.
|
On November 06 2012 14:27 puppykiller wrote:
next post responding to this post decides who I vote for in primary.
You're a bit late for the primary dood
edit: ninja'd by panther :[
For those truly confident in an Obama victory, I think this is the best course of action:
relevant: + Show Spoiler +
|
On November 06 2012 14:25 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 14:20 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 14:10 Zaqwert wrote:
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI. I don't think you understand how ROI works. Hint, if you're not using the returns in your calculation it should be an obvious hint you're doing something wrong. Edit: Eh, wouldn't have bothered responding if I'd read what you'd just posted LOL. What's to stop someone from walking around with a shotgun robbing people? Bodyguards? Should every person have a body guard, maybe the whole economy can have 0% unemployment, everyone can be some else's bodyguard. EV != ROI. He's talking EV, even though he's saying ROI. He's right, just used the wrong term.
The bookies are at 1.14 on Obama right now.
|
next post after this post decides who I vote for in election
|
On November 06 2012 14:20 Zaqwert wrote:Obama will likely win this time, but the halo is gone. He spent the entire campaign talking about petty issues, attacking Romney (some legit, some half truths, some outright bs), and really having no plan at all outside of "Romney sucks" and "Hey, remember how awesome you thought I was 4 years ago?" No grand, lofty inspirational speeches. Just standard divide and conquer politics. While Obama looks poised to win a 2nd term, the bloom is off the rose, the thrill is gone. Never put your faith or trust in a politician. The state is a fundamentally flawed concept and is nothing more than well organized violence. For all you wanna be Obama hipsters, please read this, it will blow your mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalismOf course most of you will be like "LOL, wut no gubment? But we have to have one!" because you've been brainwashed with that your whole life.
lol.
its pretty clear your anger is distorting your judgment but even if you mean to be serious no one is going to AC seriously. AC is irrelevant and always will be as long as the world moves toward federalism on a global scale. I'm pretty confident in saying you won't be on the Council on Foreign Relations anytime soon but you wouldn't want to be there in the first place.
On November 06 2012 14:29 puppykiller wrote:
next post after this post decides who I vote for in election
write in illuminati lizard
|
On November 06 2012 14:27 Zaqwert wrote:
I said EXPECTED ROI.
Over the long run if you bet a 93% favorite and get it at a price of 66% your expected ROI will be 27%
actually it would be +40%
|
On November 06 2012 14:29 puppykiller wrote:
next post after this post decides who I vote for in election
Michael Vick!
|
On November 06 2012 14:28 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 14:25 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 14:20 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 14:10 Zaqwert wrote:
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI. I don't think you understand how ROI works. Hint, if you're not using the returns in your calculation it should be an obvious hint you're doing something wrong. Edit: Eh, wouldn't have bothered responding if I'd read what you'd just posted LOL. What's to stop someone from walking around with a shotgun robbing people? Bodyguards? Should every person have a body guard, maybe the whole economy can have 0% unemployment, everyone can be some else's bodyguard. EV != ROI. He's talking EV, even though he's saying ROI. He's right, just used the wrong term. The bookies are at 1.14 on Obama right now.
That's actually really low. I have someone 5:1 odds today on Romney and they turned it down.
|
Edit doesn't count. Voting for Michael Vick. Thanks goes out to all those that campaigned.
|
On November 06 2012 14:34 puppykiller wrote:
Edit doesn't count. Voting for Michael Vick. Thanks goes out to all those that campaigned.
Pretty sure I counted as next post, quit trying to be like Florida
|
On November 06 2012 14:34 puppykiller wrote:
Edit doesn't count. Voting for Michael Vick. Thanks goes out to all those that campaigned.
Might as well vote for yourself! A vote for Michael Vick is a vote moving forward.
|
Canada11583 Posts
@Zaqwert.
It may suprise you to know it. But Anarcho-capitalists have had their fair share of preaching in both this thread and its previous iteration. It's not as mind-blowing as all that.
|
On November 06 2012 14:35 forgottendreams wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 14:34 puppykiller wrote:
Edit doesn't count. Voting for Michael Vick. Thanks goes out to all those that campaigned. Pretty sure I counted as next post, quit trying to be like Florida
But Vick is more appropriate given his user name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgs.isidewith.com/results-image/216893806.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://e.asset.soup.io/asset/3851/2606_1bff_500.png)
