I decided to open a new topic for my political bets in 2018. Two weeks ago, I lost a few free bets by backing the Sweden-Democrats - thanks for nothing Swedistanis - so I feel it's about time to make my betting record great again. I'm looking forward to place bets on the upcoming state elections in Germany (if Unibet offers them), the mid-terms in the USA and maybe an occasional bet here and there if I see value.
As usual, whenever I post a bet here in the community, I'm backing them myself with a significant amount of my own money, so feel free to follow me but be aware, there are no sure things in betting. Also, feel free to participate as well and join any potential discussion.
The first bet will come from the "In the spotlight"-section of Unibet...
Bet #1: Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed as a US Supreme Court Justice before October 31st.
Odds of 1,33 don't seem like a big deal, however I think it's a pretty nice ROI for a probable outcome within the next 1 or 2 weeks. So what's the background here? President Trump can appoint judges to serve at the US Supreme Court, which then have to be confirmed by the Senate. Since the Republicans have the majority in the Senate, this shouldn't be a problem. The DemocRats, already suffering from severe Trump Derangement Syndrome, are collectively losing the rest of their minds over it, because a Supreme Court Justice can stay in this position for as long as he/she wants.
So the democrats went to a tactic of delaying and obstructing through these hearings and even coordinated with protesters like her:
Always nice to see mentally stable people voice their concerns in a reasonable way...
Those hearings are over now, the Republicans have the majority in the Senate, so why is Unibet offering 1,33 here? Well, the democrats went to the good old tactic of accusing a conservative of sexual misconduct. This time a leftist activist (surprise, suprise), working as a psychology professor (of course) in California (yap...) claims she was touched against her will by Kavanaugh at a party 36 years ago.
Witnesses supporting her claim? No. Evidence? No. Has she told anybody else? No. Filed a police report? No.
Republicans however even offered to hear her side of the story and invited her to testify next week. Of course, now the accuser and her lawyer keep stalling and delaying...
From the article:
The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington, according to the Republican senator, which means she may need to drive across the country. Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane.
All in all, I think this is a nice opportunity to make some money off the ridiculous #metoo movement, which would be extra sweet. The mid-terms are in November, so Kavanaugh has to be confirmed before that.
So a little update:
The accuser of Mr Kavanaugh now decided to testify this Thursday (you see how these dates move back and back ). Personally, I doubt she'll show up, as testifying under oath is nothing she should want to do. I'm expecting some "minor" problems coming up next week, leading to her team trying to delay the testimony into the first week of October.
The democrats have one goal: To delay the confirmation for as long as possible, which would give them two possible options.
Option #1: The pressure on Mr Kavanaugh's family rises so much (his wife already received threats via email) that he'll quit by himself. Then King Trump would have to nominate another Supreme Court Justice who needs to be confirmed as well. This will take time until after the mid-terms. If during the mid-term elections, the democrats win the majority in the senate, they can then block the new Supreme Court Justice. Not very likely, but worth a try, especially if you're morally corrupt.
Option #2: Mr Kavanaugh gets confirmed and now the democrats and the fake news media can throw a gigantic hissy fit and they're trying to campaign off of this nomination during the mid-terms in November. This is very likely, so in order for that to happen, they need to keep Mr Kavanaugh's accuser in the news cycle for the next 6 weeks. At all costs...That means, trying to delay her testimony before the Senate for as long as possible, trying to delay the voting process itself, having the accuser and her lawyers and her spokes-people take a huge media tour after the confirmation, maybe give her a book deal. All to keep her in the media until early November.
I think next week will be absolutely insane in that regard. Personally I think the accuser won't show up because of last hour poison pill demands from her side, the Senate will confirm Kavanaugh and we'll see a huge temper tantrum from the left and the fake news media. Another option would be that she shows up in order to testify and her testimony will have more holes than a Swiss cheese. Democrats, leftists and fake news media will then go on and praise her for her "courage and bravery as a child rape survivor" and demand more investigations by maybe the FBI in order "to get to the bottom of it" (again, the goal is to stall at all costs). Senate wil confirm Mr Kavanaugh and, you probably already guessed it, we'll see a huge temper tantrum from the left and the fake news media.
Unibet still has the odds at 1,33...
Unibet has taken the Kavanaugh bet down, so I hope everybody who wanted to, could place his/her bet by now.
So far there are two accusers now, the anti-Trump psychology professor from California and now there's a 2nd accuser, pushed by the journalist who exposed Harvey Weinstein, who claims Mr Kavanaugh pulled his out at a college party 35 years ago.
All in all, those two women named 8 witnesses and guess what? All 8 of them dispute the accusations.
For a rundown on the situation you can check out this article:
My favorite part regarding the 2nd accuser:
When the New Yorker first contacted Ramirez (she's the 2nd accuser) , she said she could not say if it was Kavanaugh who exposed himself. But after “six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party.”
I think this statement speaks for itself...
And to complete this circus, now Stormy Daniels' creepy porn lawyer wants in on it as well...
I really do shake my head in disbelief at all these sorts of goings on, but then again it's politics, so why not!
Hey @GR1ZZL3R, who hasn't been in a situation like this? Decades ago, you attend a party, you're blackout drunk, you have no clear recollection of what happened, actually you never told even your best friend, but after spending a week with your lawyer, you're now certain that some things happened!
@WuDu In my long gone and foolish youth, my 21st birthday actually which i shared with my brother in law, I became somewhat inebriated, so much so that I woke up the next morning at my sister's flat with absolutely no recollection of how I got there, a total blackout of about 12 hours. Fortunately I was told that I hadn't done anything really stupid apart from chasing my father with the birthday cake and threatening to drop it on his head. If a witness came forward now and said I had danced naked down the street I would possibly have to believe it, except there were no reports at the time of any such incident from any of my friends or family. It makes you think.
Never blacked out since, thank goodness, and the alcohol intake is somewhat lower these days.
OK, it's Thursday already and today is the day of the hearings. Personally, I believe the #1 accuser (psychologist from Commiefornia) won't show up. It's simply not in her interest. Obviously her story is either totally fabricated or something really happened to her and she's now mixing up reality and fiction. Point is, what she considers the truth or wants to sell as the truth is certainly not the truth at all, meaning the more details she offers during the hearing, the more likely it is that she's contradicting herself (already happened) or stating falsehoods.
That's why all the unproven accusations are being kept so vague. If, for example, she stated that she has been attacked at John Smith's parents' home in July of 1982, however later it would turn out that John Smith didn't move to the town until September 1982, her whole story would collapse in an instant.
In case she shows up, I expect a lot of holes in the story, a lot of "I don't remember" and so on and maybe some TV friendly tears. It's all a big charade by the Democrats to stall the process and rile up the troops for the midterms supported by the Fake News Media. Really an extraordinary case study for those of you interested in politics and the media. But I'm not complaining as there's a nice chance to scoop up some additional funds along the way.