HUGE BET ON BUSH!!!!!!!!

[Eddie Haskell]

West Coast Scott:

The banter between the two of you is comical. Your talking about which states need to go which way and Chuckwad telling you you gots nothin to worry about. Frankly, I'd worry if I were you when the Chuckster tells you to "...sleep easy and trust Uncle Charlie." Whats that thing beantown says about sleeping with your hands above the covers?

Southern Scott:

Thank you. I thought it was kinda cute too.

Willard Scott:

Nevermind.

Chas:

I am a manly man and not a girly man as you imply. I will discuss politics and repeatedly beat you over your head with my logical and cogent agruments. Now to your point, I assume "bagging" on people is a derogatory term. If so, I deny that I bag on people.

Secondly, you argue that I'm off topic. You may have a point here (even a blind squirrel...). I was commenting on what I thought to be a quite humorous and pathetic exchange between you and fellow Bushbacker, Scott from the Univerisity of Spoiled Children.

Allow me to adjust my post to be more on topic. Do I think Scots "large" wager on Bush was a good bet? With all the bravado and mutual bilateral shaft polishing aside, I have no f***ing clue. However, I can understand making a bet on an athletic contest where you can use history, talent, matchups, injuries, etc to make an informed choice as to whom one favors, betting on a political election which are not subject to such factors seems a bit, shall we say, problematic.

Eddie

 

[CHARLESMANSON]

yeah Ok Eddie....no need to get so defensive. I thought it was funnier to see all the other goons in this thread hiding behind you saying..."Yeah!! you tell him Eddie!!"..."Eddie...you sure showed him"!!! lol...that was priceless.

Weather you believe it or not I think you are totally full of shit and I dissagre with you most of the time I but I do enjoy reading your posts and you've cracked me up on several occassions. Most are quite clever and articulate but I often wonder if that is only the "attorney in you" that is coming out.

 

[THE KOD]

Eddie Haskell

I don't understand your explanation to why this thread is pathetic. Especially since I supported my opinion as to why Bush "may" win?

..........................................................

West Coast Scott

Support this

:thefinger :thefinger :thefinger

 

[THE KOD]

yeah Ok Eddie....no need to get so defensive. I thought it was funnier to see all the other goons in this thread hiding behind you saying..."Yeah!! you tell him Eddie!!"..."Eddie...you sure showed him"!!!

..............................................................

Chucky

Your a coward.
Here is one for you also

:thefinger

Ed

If you need me for the short work (Manson)
just let me know.

 

[Scott4USC]

Why Bush Will Win - Dick Morris, New York Post

By DICK MORRIS

October 29, 2004 --

HERE'S a two-part test to determine who will win on Tuesday:

a) Ask yourself: What is the issue we are talking about these days? Are we focused on terrorism and Iraq, or on health care and jobs? The answer is obvious: terrorism and Iraq.

b) Now look at the polls. Not the page that shows who they're voting for. That changes every hour. Look at the page that asks, "Which candidate do you think would do the best job of handling the war in Iraq?"

The answer is always President Bush, usually by 10 points. And right below that, on "Which candidate do you think would do the best job of handling the War on Terror?" Bush leads again, usually by 20 points.

If the issue is terrorism and Iraq, and Bush wins those issues by double digits, then the winner will be . . . voila, Bush!

John Kerry was on the verge of moving out to a victory after the third debate. Taking advantage of its pre-ordained focus on domestic issues, he had finally, finally swung the debate back to the issues on which he has ? and has always had ? a lead: domestic policy. Next he got a short-term bounce from Bill Clinton's presence on the campaign trail and seemed on his way to closing the Bush lead.

Then came the "disappearing explosives" story. Kerry's handlers, tacticians to the last, disregarded the needs of basic strategy and hopped on the issue with all four feet, running a TV ad lambasting Bush for losing the weapons after the invasion.

Strategically, this flawed decision assured that the final week of the campaign would focus on the areas of Bush's strength and Kerry's weakness: Iraq and terrorism. Tactically, it tied the electorate's confidence in John Kerry to the mystery of what actually happened in an ammo dump in the desert 18 months ago.

Then it began to explode in Kerry's face. Soon we heard that there were only three tons of explosives . . . and they weren't there when we occupied the dump . . . and they were removed by the Russians before we got there . . . and, perhaps, there are satellite photos to prove it.

All of a sudden, Kerry seems just not ready for prime time.

The backfire is amplified by the involvement of CBS and The New York Times. The plans of "60 Minutes" and Dan Rather to break the story on the Sunday before the election reflect overt partisan bias ? an overt conspiracy of these leading outlets to stack the deck in favor of Kerry.

This controversy unraveling in front of us all, replete with conspiracy theories and denouement of media bias, is enough to occupy our attention and rivet our focus as Election Day approaches. It will drive all other stories off the front pages and will make the war in Iraq the key element in the election.

At this writing, the possibility that the alleged al Qaeda tape virtually endorsing Kerry will hit the airwaves makes one even more confident of a Bush victory. A threat to let blood run in the streets of America if Bush wins won't intimidate voters, but rather remind them of the importance of sending a warrior to fight the terrorists ? and seal Bush's victory.

 

[Marra]

Can I have the 20 seconds it took me to read that article back? I love reading right wing opinions with no statistical bias. Why didn't he include "When the presidents approval rating is under 50%, no president has won the election..."

John Zogby, the main pollster in the US, was just on the Daily Show. Stewart asked 'Who is going to win?' to which Zogby responded without hesitation "Kerry." And he is non-partisan.

 

[DoMyDermBest]

Scott,

this election will be over 10 minutes after the polls close in NJ. Bush will be announced the winner there by Fox. Rather, Jennings, and Brokaw, along with the CNN politburo will hold off until the polls close an hour later in Ohio, Pa, and Fla. in an attempt to keep the dem crackheads in the poll lines in those states. No, this doesn't mean USC gets to play Rutgers 5 times next season!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

One thing about it at least Scott stood by his convictions with actions and not just lip music and I give him credit for that---

"You just lost 1500 bucks. I wish I could have taken your action"

You can get all the action you want anywhere IF you got the nads.
Its about walking the walk or talking the talk.

Personally I have no bet on who wins election and but have a few props already posted--and I don't make large wagers on anything but if forced to make a wager the size of Scotts would have probably done it in a split hedge wager about 3weeks ago and took Bush over 29 1/2 states at -115 for half amount and Kerry to win @ +170 for other half. To my thiking it would be difficult to lose both-but could win both-or could make profit with split or lose small amount.
But if had to pick straight up winner would side with Bush.
Primarily because of despite media trying hard to sway this election in past week with every negative they can find on this admin-some truthful some not--Bushes #'s have not moved much--also with Bin Ladens speech and Bush being overwhelming plus with voters on war on terror I think that gives him edge.--the + for Kerry would be all the new voters registered and we know who most of them are--but will they get out and vote is the unknown.One factor that will
dampen turn out is if weather forcasts are accurrate. If you look at 5 day projection for Cleveland Ohio and Miami Fla you will see rain in the forcast

 

[AK49]

This is probably a mistake.......

This is probably a mistake.......

responding in this thread, I mean.

I have no desire to try to change anyone's mind on the politics of this thing. Wouldn't be able to do it anyway.

But, here's the thing.

We all look for good wagering propositions on this site. And I gotta tell ya, politics absolutely notwithstanding, Scott4USC and CHARLESMANSON are right......betting on Bush is like picking up free money.

I started betting Bush in July and have been adding regularly until I have more than 10 dimes on him now.

Lately, I have been pressing (now about 3 dimes) with the over 29.5a states at Pinnacle. Just better odds. Bush took 30 states in 2000. He's going to end up over 35 this year.

I respect any man's opinions on his politics but this is just business.

AK49

ps. Marra, Zogby has the WORST methodology of any major poll out there. Watch Gallup, Time and Battleground. Also, Mason-Dixon is good.

 

[smurphy]

Can you guys get a parlay on Bush + the OVER in Iraq deaths and budget deficit?

You better win a lot on this bet, because another 4 years of Dubya and unless your already rich, you'll be struggling.

I really hope you guys lose your money. Please, for the LOVE OF EVERYTHING - LOSE YOUR BET!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"You better win a lot on this bet, because another 4 years of Dubya and unless your already rich, you'll be struggling."

Those who do well will continue to do so regardless of who wins and those with the "its not my fault attitude" will continue to make excuses regardless of who is elected.

Everyone has an equal 24 hours in each day what you do with it will determine your pecking order--not who is president---granted there are some that would like you to think they will reward you for doing nothing by taking from those that do--and those that believe it and count on it are the very same that put their asperations of life in the lottery.

 

[Penguinfan]

If it comes down to Bush needing PA to win the election I can give you some actual inside information, GW will get one less vote in PA this time than he did last time, trust me on this one because I know for sure.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

For as much of a loser and chick repellent as you are, today, I just want to give you a big kiss.

Eddie

 

[Eddie Haskell]

You know PF, come to think about it, I don't know why I even talk to Wayne. I mean the commonwealth of Kentucky is one of those states, like Indiana, that is always blue. You in Pa, me, Matt in Florida, MC in Ohio, unfortuneatly Raymond in Philly are the ones that matter.

As a matter of fact, I think I will start a thread asking those in the battleground states only who they are voting for.

Eddie

 

[THE KOD]

 

[Penguinfan]

For as much of a loser and chick repellent as you are, today, I just want to give you a big kiss.

Eddie

Aaahhh, I can finally die a happy man.

 

[Scott4USC]

+ $2,500

Thanks America!

Congrats to all Bush voters and those who wagered on Bush! I wonder how many got the sweet odds on Bush +200 etc.

+ $9,500 for the week for me thanks to the Red Sox and Bush!