or is the Frenchman too busy watching his wife get plowed by her boyfriend?
Printable View
or is the Frenchman too busy watching his wife get plowed by her boyfriend?
Are those the only choices?
Pretty much, yeah.
I guess there's a lot of happy women in the Netherlands then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW1pdY3sNcA
You call that happy?
I really do hate this vile wave of nationalism.
what don't you like about it?
Nationalism is essentially teaching you how to hate people you don't even know, taking pride in things you had nothing to do with. If it was a trend heading towards individualism I'd be all for it but it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Sounds like the version of nationalism that anti-nationalists want people to have.
We have no disdain for people we don't know.
You're american, I understand it must be hard for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
What are you calling nationalism?
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017...afely-streets/
Naw we should look the other way.
https://twitter.com/RubinReport/stat...29419176046594
Yep let's keep looking the other way.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...hool-bathroom/
What is that over there? A squirrel? Those rascally little guys. So cute.
But with global warming, our children will need that year 'round tan.
The 'ukes are too pale for the future.
That political cartoon is hilarious!
What do you guys think about the current betting odds?
Probably bollocks. Brexit was 5:1 at betfair before polls closed, Trump was also a long shot. It's all part of the propaganda machine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micro2Macro
If this is true we have a seriously +EV bet on our handsQuote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
lol because bookies want to lose money.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I'd say it's not all that likely that she wins, may still be +EV but we're definitely talking about her losing more often than winning. I just don't see why she would, if you look at the last round of voting you'd assume a lot of those votes transfer to the other guy running.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micro2Macro
It's also not really an establishment vs anti-establishment thing either at this stage.
May be worth noting that Macron and the Frenchs views on things like labour may not add up so whereas Le Pen is definitely very protectionist heavy which may line up better.
I know how betting works. The odds reflect the amount of money being staked on different outcomes. If the odds were 5:1, this implies that more than 4x the amount of money wagered was being placed on remain. (probably shit maths, I pulled that out my arse and upon reread I think it's wrong, but the point remains the same)Quote:
lol because bookies want to lose money.
Who's making these bets? Not the bookmakers. So it's got fuck all to do with their business model. If there's something fishy going on, then the establishment were placing large bets on remain to give the false impression it was a foregone conclusion. If that's what happened, they utterly failed, and it's brilliant.
You're right the odds reflect on what the bettors are doing.
As for the whole conspiracy by the establishment to 'rig' the odds idea - meh. I don't think people cast their votes based on what the betting odds are do they? Like, someone is thinking 'zomg 5:1? I better bet for the favourite'. If anything having strong odds would discourage favourite supporters from thinking their vote is needed, and make the underdog supporters think their vote is very much needed.
In this case the race doesn't even appear to be close. It's more like 60-40 than 52-48 or whatever Brexit was. Don't see LePen winning.
I am curious though as to how much Trump's buffoonery since taking office has had a negative effect on populist movements in general.
Recent polls show he would win all over again if they gave Hillary a mulliganQuote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I don't think that's the point. I think it's more likely that people who were going to vote out/Trump/Le Pen see how much of a long shot it is and can't be bothered. I suspect it's an appeal to apathy.Quote:
I don't think people cast their votes based on what the betting odds are do they?
Either that or what's happening at the bookies is simply a reflection of the opinion polls, which are much easier to rig. In fact that's probably more likely, though I prefer to think they lost a shit load of money in the process of trying to rig it.
lol where are you getting 60/40? Opinion polls?Quote:
In this case the race doesn't even appear to be close. It's more like 60-40 than 52-48 or whatever Brexit was. Don't see LePen winning.
How many people didn't vote for the centrist guy? That's how many people could potentially vote for Le Pen. The French have a choice between change and no change. Don't write le Pen off based on MSM numbers. It's gonna be close, I'm not tempted to call it one way or the other.
Where are you getting that this guy isn't a change?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Also of those people who didn't vote for Le Pen surely you look at the parties they did vote for and how closely they allign with the two.
Your logic is way off.
But that's where you're wrong. It isn't a zero sum game. Say there are two possible outcomes A and B. A happens 80% of the time and B 20% bookies don't start off at 50/50 and only adjust as people bet money. If bookies knew that then they would give odds that was just worse than those of the events actually happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
The reason putting money on something changes the odds is down to bookies not having an infinite amount of money and the fact that they aren't magic perfect predictors of odds.
I'm sure "the establishment" would love to rig things like odds but what you're talking literally has no positive outcome for them and would be retarded.
Pretty much this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
I just can't see people looking at the odds at Betfair or w/e and using that as a criterion on whether or who to vote for. Only a tard does that. If something like that influenced more than 0.1% of the population I'd be surprised.
You might as well say the establishment rigs the horoscopes to make it look like their side will have a good day on the election and the other side won't.
lol, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39641442
how much ahead does one of them have to be before you think the poll has meaning?
*chuckles*Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
He's a centrist, former advisor to the current, and deeply unpopular (so much so he didn't run for office) President Hollande. Macron is the establishment, Macron is status quo.
Stop being racist to me.Quote:
I'm sure "the establishment" would love to rig things like odds but what you're talking literally has no positive outcome for them and would be retarded.
Oh, and economy minister under Hollande, too.
fwiw I'm glad I'n not French. I don't think I could vote for either of them.
Le Bernie (not his real name), I'd have voted for him.
Indeed, what a horror that Marie Lee Pen wants France to belong to the French and turned into a toilet for migrants
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
From another thread
Does not compute.Quote:
I dunno about Bernie's policies,
Honestly this is the fatal flaw of every one of Bernie Sander's supporters. They have no idea what his policies really are. They just here bold promises of unlimited government generosity and they envision a carefree life of berkenstocks and bong-rips.
That was the key to Bernie's success. If anyone ever scrutinized his policies and vetted them for plausibility, they'd realize that the man is a fucking nutjob.
Le Bernie was supposed to reference the left wing French guy whose name I could not recall. I did look at his policies.
I didn't look at the real Bernie's policies because he wasn't ever going to get into office. I thought Le Bernie had a chance.
You also think La Trump has a chance. Ah, non.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Oui oui.
La Bernie put up as strong a challenge as one can expect for fourth place. Was it 17%? That's huge. He'd have been a serious contender if he'd have got to final round.
Le Pen has the entire establishment up against her. That is a good omen if recent elections are anything to go by.
Of course she has a chance. There's a lot of disgruntled people in France. There's a lot of French people who will say that a vote for Macron is a vote for Hollande. Macron might well win comfortably, but anyone who is saying now that he will is giving the MSM far too much credit, or is deliberately pushing their agenda.
Nah, you're making connections that aren't there. Just because an anti-establishment person wins one election doesn't mean it automatically will become a worldwide trend. He's not exactly been a roaring success since taking over, despite what Fox News says.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Of course it's possible La Trump will win. It's possible a very large number of her supporters will vote and a majority of Le Establishment's won't. Anything is possible. But being possible doesn't equal being probable or likely or even having a decent chance.
Don't forget I never said Trump couldn't win. I understand the difference between a 52-48 split in the polls for Trump or Brexit and a 62-38 one for La Trump. The margin of error of a few percentage points allows for the 52-48 thing to go either way; it doesn't allow for the 62-38 one to just turn around by chance or measurement error. So unless there's something extremely dodgy about the polls or Le Establishment's supporters stay home in record numbers he's going to win.
I never said probable. I said it would be close.
Anything isn't possible though. That's a stupid thing people say. Try eating Jupiter then shit out a star.
You saying it will be close is also a meaningless pulled out of your ass thing too though.
The establishment party that has existed for like a year still cracks me up.
I pull everything out of my ass, what's new?
The establishment has only existed for a year? That's new.
The saying 'anything's possible' is not meant to be taken literally. There's a difference between physically impossible and an improbable event.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
You take me too literally.
Ya, but it's fun to point out when you're talking complete shit, literal or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
It's probably easier to point out when I'm not talking shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
^Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
If that ever happens, I will.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Hey, at least 10% of my posts in the physics thread are coming from my brain, not my ass.
Well, I say brain, but really I mean spliff.
Nah you chat almost purely shit in there too just MMM is very good at hand walking you through stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Yeah I know I'm well above your level of understanding, thanks for noticing.
Here we go
http://www.dw.com/en/eu-parliament-l...ays/a-38610329
Quote:
EU Parliament lost 5 million euros in Le Pen alleged jobs fraud, legal source says
Misuse of funds by Marine Le Pen's party may have cost the European Parliament more than twice as much as estimated, a source has said. It's just one of the charges leveled against the French presidential candidate.
And it wasn't even close, who'd have expected that?
Where are the "POLLS WERE RIGHT!!!!" headlines?
Not the guys in this storyQuote:
Originally Posted by Savy
https://theintercept.com/2017/05/06/...histleblowing/
Posobiec, of pizzagate fame (or infamy), was at it again. Except, the francophone world is a tougher nut to crack apparently. This golden quote
https://twitter.com/Aquila2407/statu...67693166845953
"On ne peut pas aimer la France tout en étant convaincu que les Français sont sots à ce point. On peut être patriote et avoir un cerveau." meaning “You can’t love France and be convinced that the French people are fools. You can be a patriot and have a brain.” gives some explanation
Also, it was just a week afterwards. There was just no time for any rumour wildfire to spread properly IMO. That or the majority of people were less gullible to believe random crap and make up their own fantasy worlds. Whatever it was, you can be sure it will be analyzed ad nauseam.
Also, don't forget about the interesting Russian cameo LOL. But I guess these were random freelancers, no way state sponsored actors would have been this careless
This is a late bump but what I hate most about a lot of recent UK coverage on thing is the whole "what x did wrong after we know the result" and they seemed to have turned this into popular article on the BBC, understandable as people will click it but it's the biggest load of absolute cock I can think of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer