There was only one outcome, idiot, so there was only one bet.
Over the majority of the election Clinton was outperforming Trump in the polls. And in fact she won the popular vote. Given that all available evidence supported Clinton, saying that Trump will win (in the absence of secret information, which I guarantee you Adams didn’t have) is the stupid bet.
I know you don’t understand this. That’s OK. As Wyatt Earp kinda said, “Maybe thinking’s just not your game Okrahoma. I know! Let’s have a spelling contest!”
In the Twitter Rules there is a section entitled, “Abusive Behavior”.
Question. Could Trump’s Twitter account be suspended by Twitter for violation of Abusive Behavior? I’m thinking about the bulleted items of Harassment, Hateful Conduct and Impersonation.
Why would they? Trump is probably the best advertising they could get for free!
Understood John Mace, but that is not what I am asking. I’m thinking in terms of Twitter deciding, for whatever reason, to wash their hands of Trump.
There were lots of bets. Every time “experts” predicted that THIS time Trump’s statement will doom him, and Adams laughed at that, that was a bet. Primaries, state by state. With “experts” predicting Trump’s doom at every turn.
Sure, they could ban his account. Hell, they could ban anyone’s account if they really wanted too…their terms of use are broad enough and set up specifically so they can do that without legal repercussions.
They simply wouldn’t do it…it would not be worth the massive fallout to them. Especially since Trump would and could use other accounts, including the US government’s various Twitter accounts. Granted, they could ban those too but you can see where this is going, I’m sure.
Adams too – he also predicted Trump’s doom, and then changed his mind. He changed his mind multiple times.
In the general election, Nate Silver was consistent – he consistently gave Trump a moderate chance of winning. It changed a bit depending on the polling, and ended up about 1 in 3 (which turned out to be pretty reasonable).
No, those were not bets.
Forget it, Colibri. It’s Sept 2016 join date-town.
Maybe you can cite a post of his that “predicted Trump’s doom”.
He famously (and facetiously)“supported” Hillary for a while- “…for my personal safety, because I live in California. It isn’t safe to be a Trump supporter where I live.” But he was consistent predicting Trump’s win throughout. Even in that post where he claimed he endorses Clinton “for my personal safety” he still predicted Trump will win.
Exactly. Why buy Coors when it’s so easy to make?
He wasn’t consistently predicting Trump’s win – here’s just one of the instances in which he decided that Hillary was going to win.
Cool. You found a wrong prediction of his. Vs. literally hundreds by so-called “experts” during the same time period. Adams still wins. And so does Trump.
Much like Trump himself, there wasn’t a single position on the election that Adams didn’t hold at one time or another. By simultaneously holding every possible position on the election, he set himself up to claim victory no matter what the outcome. Of course only a very stupid person would be fooled by that, but again as the Trump election showed, there’s no shortage of stupid people.
Adams “wins” by taking every possible position at some point so that, no matter what happens, he can claim that he was correct. A lot of the “experts” were similarly wrong, but they were a bit more consistent at least. Some of the experts (like Nate Silver in particular) came out looking pretty good, actually. Far from perfect, but still pretty good.
Never did like okra all that much. Gross, slimy stuff.
Two days after the post you quoted he switched back to “98% chance of Trump winning”. So Adams was wrong for two days. “Experts” were wrong for a year.
I assume you must believe that a stopped clock is more accurate than one that’s off by three minutes.