r/extremelyinfuriating • • 3d ago

Discussion We shouldn't be gambling on who is president.

Post image

How is this not a form of election interference?

222 Upvotes

29 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 3d ago

Hello, u/Feisty-Giraffe-8306 ! Thanks for your submission to r/extremelyinfuriating, your post is up and running!

This is a general reminder to check out our rules in the sidebar. If your post breaks the rules, it will be removed by our moderators.

We would like for each and everyone to feel welcome on the subreddit and to keep a healthy and safe environment for the community.

Thanks :)

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

131

u/DoctorObservation 3d ago

It’s weird but one study found that by allowing people to gamble on elections, it encouraged some voters to become better informed. Given how uninformed many voters are, it could be worse.

33

u/DarthBen_in_Chicago 3d ago

I mean he already has 3% come on

13

u/DoctorObservation 3d ago

It’s not like any policy can prevent a significant percentage of people from being incomprehensibly stupid. But yeah. 3% is terrifying.

5

u/HERMANNATOR85 3d ago

9.9 million idiots

3

u/HistoricalSea5600 3d ago

Okay, but they are all that dumb. What if they all wrote his name in?

13

u/probablydeadsooon 3d ago

I feel like these are poll numbers, well at least closer than anything I would see on in the news. But I agree it should not be legal.

10

u/CharAznableLoNZ 3d ago

It's a shame you can't short a bet. Some people haven't heard of the 22nd amendment.

3

u/ZorbaTHut 2d ago

Yes you can. That's what the "no" column is.

6

u/YendorZenitram 3d ago

Those numbers are depressing.

I've seen similar for the midterms. We're hosed.

6

u/psychoPiper 3d ago

Don't forget that a large portion of right wing inside traders are connected to platforms like this. Imo the fact that they're advertising it at all indicates that they're confident what the outcome will be

2

u/not_wall03 2d ago

There are many more possible viable democratic candidates then republican ones. So it evens out

4

u/Master_Ad1130 3d ago

Interference? How would external gambling change the results? It sounds like you’re just bitching to bitch.

3

u/stereorecord 3d ago

Yeah it’s not like sports betting where the players playing can fix the game. Politics is a bit different

1

u/thala_7777777 17h ago

what is the % of bideen

1

u/Apart_Young_9979 3d ago

Remove the last 4 words from the title and its much better

-9

u/SimplySomeDude 3d ago

why not? People's personal freedoms shouldn't be infringed because you feel like something is "wrong"

2

u/WerdaVisla 2d ago

Because betting is proven to encourage result manipulation pretty much everywhere it happens. Which is, historically, REALLY not something you want in elections.

1

u/CerifiedHuman0001 2d ago

There‘a a difference between personal freedoms and anarchy.

-5

u/Iamgoingtohavatroke 3d ago

Been seeing a lot of people just bitching to bitch it's honestly annoyingly extremely infuriating lol

-5

u/TheRealMakenzie 3d ago

What's your personal opinion on the legality of personal recerational use of Heroin? Do you believe the government should restrict the personal use of drugs that can cause severe harm to self and/or others?

0

u/SimplySomeDude 3d ago

no. Unless the use of a substance actively harms or has the capability to actively harm another person by its chemical or material properties alone either spontaneously or by a human action, it should not be regulated.

-1

u/TheRealMakenzie 3d ago

Glad you are atleast consistent

0

u/Hizam5 3d ago

People betting on DJT is free money for everyone else god people are dumb

1

u/TonyGram-Z 2d ago

I wouldnt put it past the US to make him eligible for a third term somehow. Probably the Supreme Court could argue he didnt serve two consecutive turns and get away with it.

1

u/Hizam5 2d ago

Wouldn’t that fuck with their almighty constitution though?

3

u/iJon_v2 2d ago

Like they care about that when it serves them not to.

1

u/TonyGram-Z 12h ago

You mean a constitution that can just be interpreted as meaning the except opposite and back (looking at you ab*rtion)?