45
Comments (31)
sorted by:
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

He has won the election. Yes now we need to prove it, but there are now hundreds if not thousands of affidavits. They only need to prove preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

2
Hillary_Clontin 2 points ago +2 / -0

They also won’t accept any bets on it.

I just tried - I deposited $250 to bet and it won’t accept it.

2
leroy1 2 points ago +2 / -0

You have to call up as its classed as an 'in-play' bet

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

Call and you can

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Which country are you in fren

3
Hillary_Clontin 3 points ago +3 / -0

Australia - that’s the problem - I just phoned them.

It’s considered “in play” because the election has started - so I can place a bet - but I have to phone them up to do it - and my accounts too fresh at the moment to make a live account - will soon though for sure. Awesome odds

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah I'm in Perth lol had to phone them. Sweet yeah for sure.

1
Hillary_Clontin 1 point ago +2 / -1

Those odds you’d be crazy not to - I already have massive bets at way worse odds with Sportsbet / happy to buy these while I can

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep same, it's in our blood. 🤪

2
leroy1 2 points ago +2 / -0

State betting is a good one too huge odds on some the states

1
Hillary_Clontin 1 point ago +2 / -1

“This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market. In the event that no Presidential candidate receives a majority of the projected Electoral College votes, this market will be settled on the person chosen as President in accordance with the procedures set out by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

That fine print is pretty gross -

The fine print on “winning party” seems better , with slightly lower odds

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Actually looks quite good, because faithless elector won't void the bet, and it's unlikely that Biden will get to 270 ec votes. I did read through that before deciding. 12th amendment allows each state to vote for the President. So as long as scotus justices rule enough to quash the fraudulent votes, he will either get to 270 or win by vote.

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

I may have put $1000 at 25:1 on him.

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Weak, I'm $1050 lmao

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

I may already have over 50:times that amount on Trump through Sportsbet 😳

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Haha damn! Betting is in our blood. Fwiw I still think he will pull it off bigly! These odds are ludicris. If anyone can pull this off it's him.

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am in a 24/7 anxiety attack

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

How we feeling today? Trump is still confident. All going to plan by my looks.

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’ve drinking heavily

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

MAGA 🇺🇸

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Same! 3 weeks next to no proper sleep. It's taking control.

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

There’s a lot of us going prematurely Grey

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Odds have come down quite a bit

2
The_red_hat 2 points ago +2 / -0

Indeed !

1
weltbild 1 point ago +2 / -1

4% seems about right

1
Conservativetim [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why would you say that? Most of these cases are clear cut, the law is very clear. Between that and Roberts assigning justices to each circuit courts, these cases won't need to be judged by a majority in SCOTUS.

2
weltbild 2 points ago +3 / -1

power politics, the law doesnt really mean shit otherwise the election would have already been won by trump

2
Conservativetim [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think the lower level judges just hot-potatoed it, cases are solid with good evidence. Also, SCOTUS probably ruling in their best interest also. They don't want the court packed.