Subject: Re: The Problem With Polymarket
albaby1: I'm not sure I understand the argument that Polymarket is "misleading" voters...

Here's why, as revealed by the Wall Street Journal and others this morning: just four betting accounts in total have swayed the odds from about 50-50 to 62-38 by wagering close to $30 million of crypto over the past two weeks on Trump winning.

Trump’s gains on Polymarket have cheered his supporters, and they have been followed by the odds shifting in Trump’s favor in other betting markets. Elon Musk flagged Trump’s growing lead on Polymarket to his 200 million X followers on Oct. 6, praising the concept of betting markets. “More accurate than polls, as actual money is on the line,” Musk posted.

But the surge might be a mirage manufactured by a group of four Polymarket accounts that have collectively pumped about $30 million of crypto into bets that Trump will win.

“There’s strong reason to believe they are the same entity,” said Miguel Morel, chief executive of Arkham Intelligence, a blockchain analysis firm that examined the accounts.


Elon, Elon, is that you? Or as Dementia Don likes to call him: Leon?

Now before you say, "Well, that's not Polymarket's fault, that's someone taking advantage of how betting markets work," that's a difference without distinction.

And since hclasvegas has brought 538 into the mix this morning, follow the money: Polymarket=Peter Theil=Nate Silver.

It's all part of the same scam to make Trump look like he's surging to influence voters. And one more talking point should Trump lose: "The election was sooooo rigged. Look at how far I was ahead in the betting markets. I won and those bets prove it."

BTW, anyone read the articles this morning that Russia's funding Tucker Carlson and Jordan Peterson?

Oh right, I forgot: Russian influence in U.S. elections isn't actually a real thing, kinda' like foreign betting markets don't influence voters' thinking.


https://www.wsj.com/finance/be...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...