Anyone want to bet me regarding Gavin Newsom being recalled?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by padre33

:this:this

The rigged shit is going to be so many's go to on this one too. Sad

Whats your connection to Ca FTP? I thought you were Az, hope you didn't bet on this.

---

Didnt bet on this.. My dad grew up in Cali.. Theres still family farm land outside Lincoln and I have a a bunch of family including my grandfathers youngest brother a retired MD who lives in Northern Cali.. BTW he also didnt get the shot and refuses to and hes a retired MD of nearly 50 yrs.. What I find amusing is the media is crickets about the large numbers of medical personnel refusing to be vaxxed including MDs and nurses among others who are outright quitting and daring the facility/company to fire them over their refusal.. Theyd love to have everybody believing front line healthcare workers are all shotted up but its not even close.. Again I got my shot shortly after the window opened ,after my near death case, end of July but I had my own personal reasons to not want to risk getting a 3rd case of it.. I can tell you had J&J not been available I wouldnt have done so..

---

Glad you are still kicking buddy and hope your health keeps improving. Northern California is really beautiful imo and I like the Scaramento area. The homeless problem in my state is a huge fucking problem. That being said poverty and hunger are World Problems that have been around forever and a tough nut to crack. Obv it starts with mental health and access to programs for addiction to get people on the right track quicker. If I were homeless I would most likely pick Ca also.

Being all over my state recently I chatted up a bunch of homeless. Most of these people are content in their situation however dire that may be. Are there some violent bad people amongst them? Of course but I don't think it's that much more than the normal population. I gave away some meals and some weed, one very old guy even gave me 3$ to get him a beer cause he was in a wheelchair. I brought him back 2 beers, a sandwich and 5$. Even with our homeless problem, fires, stuck up governor, expensive housing I aint ever leaving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

If you don’t mind sharing, how much did you lose betting against Newsom?

---

A little less than $1100.

I got +250 which was the betting line at the time.

---

In retrospect, do you still think that was a reasonable line?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

---

yeah I'm sure that's accurate

you will believe anything as long as it comes from occupydemocrats

fucking faggot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwai

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

---

yeah I'm sure that's accurate

you will believe anything as long as it comes from occupydemocrats

fucking faggot

---

What is incorrect about it?

I know that Druff believes that, if there had been a strong Republican Hispanic candidate, they might have won the Recall. While I don't believe that they could have won, they certainly would have had a somewhat better result.

The question is really whether Blacks and Hispanics would ever vote in large numbers for the candidate of a party that doesn't seem to really want them to vote.

An interesting poll question for registered Republicans only would be: Should Black and Hispanic American citizens be allowed to vote?

Hopefully, for the sake of this nation's future the response would be something like 95%- 5% in favor. However, I just have this fear that the result might be closer to a tepid 65%-35% in favor. I just am not sure how this poll that will never happen might turn out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnCommode

I know that Druff believes that, if there had been a strong Republican Hispanic candidate, they might have won the Recall. While I don't believe that they could have won, they certainly would have had a somewhat better result.

The question is really whether Blacks and Hispanics would ever vote in large numbers for the candidate of a party that doesn't seem to really want them to vote.

An interesting poll question for registered Republicans only would be: Should Black and Hispanic American citizens be allowed to vote?

Hopefully, for the sake of this nation's future the response would be something like 95%- 5% in favor. However, I just have this fear that the result might be closer to a tepid 65%-35% in favor. I just am not sure how this poll that will never happen might turn out.

---

Republicans want them to vote. It’s easy for everyone to vote. Thinking blacks don’t have the same capability to vote as other races is racist.

Check the data from the recall, Hispanic men moving right slowly but surely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Walter Sobchak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwai

yeah I'm sure that's accurate

you will believe anything as long as it comes from occupydemocrats

fucking faggot

---

What is incorrect about it?

---

Cases per 100k over the last week is a dumb metric.

A ton of counties in the state don't even have 100,000 people, while LA county has 25,000 deaths.

But LOL those dumb recalling hicks in Trinity Co. population 12k with their high current case rate and a whopping 7 deaths.

How about a map that compares recall votes to number of homeless people per 100k? Or street turds per mile?

Many of the places that voted not to recall are the epitome of human suffering, but nobody in the YES counties is voting for people to die, just clean themselves up and keep people from shitting in the streets.

The modern left want you to die if you think differently than them, but they keep telling us they are the good guys and on the right side of history. Guess we will see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v12cl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Walter Sobchak

What is incorrect about it?

---

Cases per 100k over the last week is a dumb metric.

A ton of counties in the state don't even have 100,000 people, while LA county has 25,000 deaths.

But LOL those dumb recalling hicks in Trinity Co. population 12k with their high current case rate and a whopping 7 deaths.

How about a map that compares recall votes to number of homeless people per 100k? Or street turds per mile?

Many of the places that voted not to recall are the epitome of human suffering, but nobody in the YES counties is voting for people to die, just clean themselves up and keep people from shitting in the streets.

The modern left want you to die if you think differently than them, but they keep telling us they are the good guys and on the right side of history. Guess we will see.

---

Cope harder.

Quick, somebody fetch me a Newsom Derangement Syndrome gif.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnCommode

I know that Druff believes that, if there had been a strong Republican Hispanic candidate, they might have won the Recall. While I don't believe that they could have won, they certainly would have had a somewhat better result.

The question is really whether Blacks and Hispanics would ever vote in large numbers for the candidate of a party that doesn't seem to really want them to vote.

An interesting poll question for registered Republicans only would be: Should Black and Hispanic American citizens be allowed to vote?

Hopefully, for the sake of this nation's future the response would be something like 95%- 5% in favor. However, I just have this fear that the result might be closer to a tepid 65%-35% in favor. I just am not sure how this poll that will never happen might turn out.

---

I'm afraid you are being tricked into believing the Democratic narrative about "voter suppression", which is mostly BS. Just like the "voter fraud" narrative from Republicans is mostly BS.

Like many other things in life, the voter suppression story comes down to a math problem.

Democrats know that black people strongly favor their party, so the more black people voting, the better for them in elections. Republicans know the same thing, so they would prefer black people stay home on election day.

Is that racism? No. It's partisanism. Along the same lines, Democrats want rich, educated, coastal whites to show up at the polls. Republicans wants rich, educated, coastal whites to stay home.

On the flip side, Democrats want rural white people in most areas to stay home, while Republicans want them out voting. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.

So... Democrats noticed that, in many elections, black people aren't voting as often as other races. They ask themselves, "How do we get more black people to show up to the polls and get us more votes?" Various "get out the vote" efforts have failed over the years, so now they want to modify the rules in order to make it "easier" for black people to vote. These include long early vote periods, mail-in balloting, drop boxes, vote harvesting, mobile buses acting as polling places, anti-voter-ID laws, auto-registrations, etc.

You might say, "Great! The more opportunities to vote, the better!"

But wait... that's not necessarily true. First off, the right to vote does not guarantee EFFORTLESS voting. It simply means that you have access to vote, a reasonable time frame to do it, and no undue burden preventing you. It does NOT mean that your vote is being suppressed if you're simply too lazy to put out a minimal effort to register and vote. This is especially true because there's no racist element to disallowing certain voting methods.

But you may ask, "What's the problem with adding easier ways to vote?" Because they can be cherry-picked to increase certain desired demographics voting. That allows elections to be semi-rigged. Election laws need to be neutral, and not crafted around which demographic groups they can squeeze more votes from.

This is where "voter suppression" lies come in. For example, there was all of that panic earlier about the Georgia voting law, which in fact resulted in the lol removal of the MLB All Star game from Atlanta. One of the elements of that law made it illegal to hand out food and water to people in line. People screamed how cruel that was, but once you thought about it, this made total sense. Free food and drink is a gift -- and an appreciated one on a hot day with a long line! If you are undecided, and the person giving you the gift is clearly on one political side, you might very well decide to vote that way simply because you were given such a gift! That's straight up bribery for votes, and of course it makes sense to eliminate it.

A related news blurb.



:lol2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnCommode

I know that Druff believes that, if there had been a strong Republican Hispanic candidate, they might have won the Recall. While I don't believe that they could have won, they certainly would have had a somewhat better result.

The question is really whether Blacks and Hispanics would ever vote in large numbers for the candidate of a party that doesn't seem to really want them to vote.

An interesting poll question for registered Republicans only would be: Should Black and Hispanic American citizens be allowed to vote?

Hopefully, for the sake of this nation's future the response would be something like 95%- 5% in favor. However, I just have this fear that the result might be closer to a tepid 65%-35% in favor. I just am not sure how this poll that will never happen might turn out.

---

I know plenty of middle class Hispanic Californians who are disillusioned with the Democratic Party. The problem is that the leader of the Republican Party thinks most Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers. Until the California GOP leadership completely disassociates itself from Trump, they will continue to be irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptoNinja

I’m not back, but I would like to be paid. I’m not going to chase you down or ask a second time though, so it’s on you of you decide not to pay me, or to blow it off for 6 months. My $50 donation to the freeroll pool should stand even though I wont be playing anymore after you disrespected all of our time the way you did. BTC: 3JCASaqzQQxmHgrHRYDxBeN6ZFhsQaMmg6

---

Really no need to be a dick to Druff just saying.. Druff has never welched on a payout for a bet and to imply he would is pretty fucking shitty to even suggest

:laterfag

---

I don’t believe that prior to this he has never welched. Doesn’t matter, just as I predicted he has not paid me. First time for everything I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptoNinja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

Really no need to be a dick to Druff just saying.. Druff has never welched on a payout for a bet and to imply he would is pretty fucking shitty to even suggest

:laterfag

---

I don’t believe that prior to this he has never welched. Doesn’t matter, just as I predicted he has not paid me. First time for everything I guess.

---

He will pay us both, settle down.

I can't believe CryptoNinja is acting like this.

He's angry about a canceled freeroll which began and finished BEFORE radio (because radio got delayed a few hours, and I forgot to take it offline). This tournament had no announced prizepool or radio thread mentioning it.

Had I announced a freeroll and prizepool, and then started radio hours late and wouldn't honor it, he'd have good reason to be annoyed. However, even in that case, note that tis' free money being given away each week, on a site which runs at a loss, so your expectations need to be low.

Due to the above incident (he won the freeroll and thinks I wasted his time), he decided to quit listening to radio and quit posting on this forum. That's obviously his right to do, but it's a stupid reason.

I just PM'd Walter yesterday asking him for payment info. Note that Walter didn't even ask to get paid -- I went to him and asked him how he'd like to get the money. I owe him $1000. I owe CryptoNinja less than $100. Obviously I'm not going to welch on any bet, but if I were, I'd welch on the big one, not the small one, right?

This is really much ado about nothing. I apologize that I didn't turn off the freeroll that night. It was an oversight. I felt bad that some people played anyway, believing a prize was going to be awarded, but in my defense, there was never any freeroll or prizepool announced -- it was just still running on the site due to my failure to remove it. While you being mildly annoyed would be understandable, it makes sense why this is such a big deal to you.

Lies. My bet was more than $100 and I won. How do you owe me less than $100? This is money I bet because trying to collect there is always some problem. Some of this you have owed me for almost a year. You call yourself a professional gambler? Ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptoNinja

Lies. My bet was more than $100 and I won. How do you owe me less than $100? This is money I bet because trying to collect there is always some problem. Some of this you have owed me for almost a year. You call yourself a professional gambler? Ridiculous.

---

I haven't added it up yet. Maybe it's more than $100. Whatever it is, I'll pay.

But let's focus on why you're so mad about the freeroll. You realize it was just an oversight that I didn't remove it from the poker room, and that it was never announced, right? Again, I understand why it was a bit confusing and why you're annoyed you got nothing for winning, but you're really mad enough to quit this site and quit listening to radio?

There are many good reasons to quit listening to radio. Perhaps you think the show isn't good anymore. Perhaps you're tired of it. Perhaps you're tired of stuff related to poker and gambling. Perhaps you just don't have time for it. But to quit over this is insane.

The freeroll mistake was disrespectful to everyone’s time. It’s frustrating but excusable, I agree. The quitting thing is due to the pro-life propaganda which I have no patience for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptoNinja

The freeroll mistake was disrespectful to everyone’s time. It’s frustrating but excusable, I agree. The quitting thing is due to the pro-life propaganda which I have no patience for.

---

What pro-life propaganda? Abortion has never been one of my bigger political issues, and for decades I accepted Roe v Wade as a compromise between the two sides which was mostly reasonable.

Unfortunately, Roe has been perverted from its original intention of "safe, legal, and rare" to "as long as a woman can get a shady doctor to sign off on it, you can murder a fully developed baby, and it's legal".

You may not agree with my objection, but I'm sure you can see why this alarms me, as someone who doesn't like to see fully formed babies legally murdered.

Regardless, it's a political position I hold, and I have always been open about my conservative politics. However, it's not a political show, and I mostly hold the political stuff until the end, so people can turn it off at that point if they don't want to hear it. Many episodes have no politics at all.

Anyway, I will send you the bitcoin soon, so no worries about that. What you choose to do from there is obviously up to you.

I don't think babies are fully formed til age 30ish, or maybe in Newsoms case, 55?