I know, I know. I am a bad person, so I do bad things, because what else can bad people do, right?
The real deal, which you don’t give one shit about because I am a bad person who does bad things, is that I don’t want to have the possibility of an argument arising about why Obama didn’t run or couldn’t run or whether he was really incapacitated or whether incapacitation caused by his own choices or by an act of Zeus counts or whatever-the-fuck. Either he’s the next president in the term immediately following this one or he’s not. End of story.
It’s a wonder that you wipe people’s butts for a living with those stellar mind-reading skills of yours. Also, it’s nice that you make up some future blustering that I am sure to do–I guess that adds future prediction as well as mind reading to your resume.
I’d be happy to bet you $100 even-up that a Democrat is sworn in as President in 2013. Except I’m worried that you’ll claim that that person is not a Democrat, but is a Socialist or Communist or liberal douche. In other words, I expect that you would attempt to weasel out of it, and if you couldn’t weasel out of it, you wouldn’t pay. In other other words, I don’t trust you.
I don’t trust you either, which is part of the reason I want odds.
Your own post shows how untrustworthy you are–betting on “any Democrat” to win is the exact same thing as betting on Obama to win. The powers-that-be have selected that articulate black man to carry their water, and carry it he shall.
Then please elucidate. If you just meant “any Democrat” to cover the Obama death/incapacitation scenarios, then fine, I will cop to forgetting about that momentarily.
So we’re on then? $100 even-up, on my side that a Democrat is sworn in as President following the 2012 election, on your side that a Democrat is not?
(This is, by the way, exactly the same bet I made with Bricker re: the 2008 election. As I recall, the bet was placed in very early 2007. And the same bet I made with him re: the 2004 election, though that one was only $50.)
That makes no sense. If you don’t trust somebody to pay a $1000 bet why would you trust them to pay a $15,000 bet?
My opinion is that you asked for 15-1 odds because you lack the courage of your convictions. You want to say you were willing to back up your political opinions with real money but you made the terms so ridiculous you knew nobody would call your bluff.
As mentioned above, I’m not placing any bets at least until I know who the GOP is fielding.
I will, however, offer my services as an escrow holder and judge, if there are people who are on opposite sides of the question that don’t trust each other but happen to trust me.
I’m very disappointed that my worthy adversary will not engage my offer any further. I so dearly want to take his money. He has so much of it, and I am a filthy liberal who believes in redistribution of wealth.
It’s funny that you’re now specifying that “democrat to win” and “Obama to win” is the same scenario, when a few posts ago you were making sure that any scenarios in which the democrats win but it’s not Obama would be a win for you.
It’s about the economy. If the jobs don’t get significantly better, he won’t stand a chance. The economy is still a big mess. People will vote him out if he doesn’t get this unemployment rate down a lot.
The big key will be this Novemeber’s mid terms. If the Republicans can jump on the unemployment issue they will win a lot. Not enough to regain control of either house, but enough to make Mr Obama nervous
You wanted to make sure it was clear that the bet you would take was specifically for Obama to win, and not just any democrat. It was important for you to specify this condition, and it opened up new avenues for you to win. Now you’re claiming that Obama winning and democrats winning is the same thing, thereby downplaying the condition you just thought was important enough to ask for.
If, as you say, whether Obama or a democrat wins is an unimportant distinction and practically the same thing, then you should let people just bet on the democrat to make them happy in the event that we have something like Obama’s death. More likely you understand that it actually is an important distinction, and there’s a non-insignificant chance that Obama won’t be the democratic nominee next cycle, and you want to be sure to carve out that little extra advatnage for yourself. That’s fine, I defended your stipulation against “fraudulent” accusations from Diogenes, but you shouldn’t be disingenuous about it.
Well, like I said, you are missing the distinction between the technicalities and practicalities. If you feel that you have shown me to be talking out of both sides of my mouth or what-have-you, then you go ahead and feel that way, and I hope it makes you feel better about yourself (or whatever).
I’m calling it as I see it. You want to paint me as having a bias against you and trying to point out your flaws, but when Dio accused your offer of being fraudulent I defended it. Everything I’ve said in this thread has been true and to the point.
You really only have two ways to go with this. Either the chance of a non-Obama democrat running/winning in 2012 is significant, and therefore should be reflected in the odds of an Obama-only bet, or it’s insignificant, in which case you should just let the other person have their out in the event that Obama isn’t in the running in 2012.
And it you feel that making up some babble about “technicalities and practicalities” covers up the fact that everyone in this thread can see you’ve gotten in over your head here, then you go ahead and feel that way, and I hope it makes you feel better about yourself (or whatever).
Not me, man. Nothing would make me happier than seeing Obama pulling away from the White House with a packed U-Hall come January 2013, but it won’t happen. My entire life there have only been two one-term presidents, the first of whom was already in office when I was born, and it seems clear that it doesn’t matter how bad a president is, as long as they don’t stupidly promise “no new taxes, read my lips” people will reelect them.
