The Institute of 2012 GOP nomination Intrade rankings

[Mr. Morden]

Romney breaks 60 on the GOP presidential nomination, and breaks 30 on winning individual:

GOP nominee

Romney 61.5
Perry 19.6
Cain 7.3
Huntsman 3.6
Paul 2.3
Gingrich 1.9
Bachmann 1.4
Giuliani 1.1
Johnson 0.5
Huckabee 0.4
Santorum 0.4

Winning individual

Obama 47.5
Romney 30.8
Perry 9.0
Cain 3.5
Paul 2.7
Huntsman 2.2
Clinton 2.1
Gingrich 1.0
Bachmann 0.6
Biden 0.5

[GMantis]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

jmfcst's don't do Intrade.

[Phony Moderate]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

jmfcst's don't do Intrade.

Because they lack the required intelligence.

[Mr. Morden]

Also not taking Cain seriously: Mitt Romney

I just watched Romney's interview on the PBS Newshour.  He's mostly ignoring his rivals, but still throws occasional jabs at Perry.  I don't think he really sees Cain as a serious threat.  My guess is that he'll largely ignore Cain in Tuesday's debate, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

And none of the other candidates seem to be going after Cain either.  Will be interesting to see if that changes any time soon.

[Bull Moose Base]

Also not taking Cain seriously: Mitt Romney

I just watched Romney's interview on the PBS Newshour.  He's mostly ignoring his rivals, but still throws occasional jabs at Perry.  I don't think he really sees Cain as a serious threat.  My guess is that he'll largely ignore Cain in Tuesday's debate, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

And none of the other candidates seem to be going after Cain either.  Will be interesting to see if that changes any time soon.

Politico put up a montage a couple days ago of all the times Romney has lavished praise on Cain so far this cycle.

[© tweed]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

jmfcst's don't do Intrade.

good, because your massive pushing of Perry stock about a month ago is worth between 50 and 60 cents on the dollar.

[ag]

Seriously, though, you're right about excluding Unitarians as well as Mormons with really restrictive definitions of Christianity. It just gets annoying when people here like to casually refer to Mormons as "not Christian" (when convention says otherwise) without mentioning that they're using an unusual definition of Christian.

I thought a definition that is given by Churches to which most of the world's self-designated Christians adhere, would be usual, rather than unusual. Mormons are not Christian from the standpoint of most Trinitarian churches. Significantly, as far as I know, Mormon baptism is not recognized as a Christian sacrament by the Catholic Church (which, I believe recognizes almost any baptism ritual held in almost any Christian community otherwise).

[Averroës Nix]

Almost all Mormons self-identify as Christian and about two-thirds of the American public agrees. Whether Trinitarian church bodies formally recognize Romney as baptized is a technicality.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

jmfcst's don't do Intrade.

good, because your massive pushing of Perry stock about a month ago is worth between 50 and 60 cents on the dollar.

I advised someone to buy Perry?

[Saxwsylvania]

Intrade doesn't really seem to take Cain seriously.

jmfcst's don't do Intrade.

good, because your massive pushing of Perry stock about a month ago is worth between 50 and 60 cents on the dollar.

I advised someone to buy Perry?

Not explicitly, but you sort of implied it:

don't see any way for him to beat Perry

look, fellas, the train has already left the station, trying to recall it by pointing out Perry was a Dem 20 years ain't gonna work....so give it up.

Perry is at his peak right now.  He will fall once people start to meet him, but still win out in the end.

Perry is an excellent campaigner...no reason to think he has peaked.

Perry is a seasoned pol....he's unlikely to implode during one the debates.  So, unless Paul Ryan (or another big hitter) enters the race, looks like Perry is the GOP nominee.

again, unless Perry is taped drowning a litter of bloodhound puppies, the GOP nomination is OVER!

[© tweed]

he also explicitly said to short Romney at 30, and the value of that stock has since doubled.

[© tweed]

and also this:

Aside from a major scandal or a new entry into the race, here are the odds on winning the GOP nomination:

Perry: 95%
Paul: 5% (if the economy goes to hell in a handbasket, people might be desperate enough to have a revolution against government)
everyone else: 0%

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

and also this:

Aside from a major scandal or a new entry into the race, here are the odds on winning the GOP nomination:

Perry: 95%
Paul: 5% (if the economy goes to hell in a handbasket, people might be desperate enough to have a revolution against government)
everyone else: 0%

Well, going by that jmfcst said that Perry can't win, his new odds are

Paul: 100%
everyone else: 0%

ITS OFFICIAL: JMFCST PREDICTS A PAUL VICTORY

[Yelnoc]

and also this:

Aside from a major scandal or a new entry into the race, here are the odds on winning the GOP nomination:

Perry: 95%
Paul: 5% (if the economy goes to hell in a handbasket, people might be desperate enough to have a revolution against government)
everyone else: 0%

Well, going by that jmfcst said that Perry can't win, his new odds are

Paul: 100%
everyone else: 0%

ITS OFFICIAL: JMFCST PREDICTS A PAUL VICTORY

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

oh, so it's dis the jmfcst time....well, let's review the facts...It's fact time...Fact time for jmfcst...

Someone look up the price of Perry on Intrade from a) August 18th at 7pm to  b) after the debate ended on Sept 22....

jmfcst pumps Perry...

Perry is a seasoned pol....he's unlikely to implode during one the debates.  So, unless Paul Ryan (or another big hitter) enters the race, looks like Perry is the GOP nominee.

jmfcst dumps Perry...

well, if Perry doesnt perform well tonight in the debate...his reign as frontrunner will be short lived.

Perry is proving he is an empty suit.  we need someone like jmfcst, someone willing to spend money on the right things that will provide career private sector jobs

Perry is showing why he basically stayed out of sight in Austin the last 12 years, so much so that Texans like me hardly heard a word about him...not only is no one home, the lights aren't even on.

conservatives dont have a viable canidate....so I think there is STILL time for someone else, other than Palin, to enter the race

[© tweed]

oh, so it's dis the jmfcst time....well, let's review the facts...It's fact time...Fact time for jmfcst...

when you claim to have a direct line to God and a monopoly on certainty, you will gain yourself some rivals, and they will much enjoy pointing it out when fate proves you wrong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

jmfcst dumps Perry...

well, if Perry doesnt perform well tonight in the debate...his reign as frontrunner will be short lived.

Perry is proving he is an empty suit.  we need someone like jmfcst, someone willing to spend money on the right things that will provide career private sector jobs

Perry is showing why he basically stayed out of sight in Austin the last 12 years, so much so that Texans like me hardly heard a word about him...not only is no one home, the lights aren't even on.

conservatives dont have a viable canidate....so I think there is STILL time for someone else, other than Palin, to enter the race

[/quote]

that basically places you 'in' on him at his peak and 'out' as his value started to crash.  if you dumped on the 22nd you probably would have lost minimal money, maybe 5-10%.  by Oct 1 he had lost 40-50% of his value.  

[Bull Moose Base]

jmfcst, the parallels between your words and Perry's being thrown in your faces is eerie.  You both would be wiser to own up to guessing wrong... Friendly advice from the wisest, best predictor on the board (who back in June told The Cainmentum Formerly Known As Yelnoc he was crazy for thinking Cain would still be in contention for anything come Fall.)

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

when you claim to have a direct line to God and a monopoly on certainty, you will gain yourself some rivals, and they will much enjoy pointing it out when fate proves you wrong.

I have NEVER claimed that God gave me any info on any candidate.  And you've been here long enough to know that, so stop lying about my testimony.


What I have said I was certain about is that no candidate has won the GOP nomination without the support of the jmfcst's...and right now that support is with Cain.

---

that basically places you 'in' on him at his peak and 'out' as his value started to crash.  if you dumped on the 22nd you probably would have lost minimal money, maybe 5-10%.  by Oct 1 he had lost 40-50% of his value.  

actually, on Aug 18th Perry was at 35.5, peaked a couple of weeks later at 39 around Sept 5-7th and was at 36 the evening of the Sept 22 when I gave up on him:

well, if Perry doesnt perform well tonight in the debate...his reign as frontrunner will be short lived.

so, if you were using me as a guide as to when to buy Perry (though I never gave a recomendation to buy him), why didn't you use me as a guide as to when to sell him?!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

jmfcst, the parallels between your words and Perry's being thrown in your faces is eerie.  You both would be wiser to own up to guessing wrong... Friendly advice from the wisest, best predictor on the board (who back in June told The Cainmentum Formerly Known As Yelnoc he was crazy for thinking Cain would still be in contention for anything come Fall.)

the ONLY thing I guessed wrong about was Perry's debate performance, which cost him the nomination...which, I am glad because I always stated he was a tool.

[Torie]

jmfcst, the parallels between your words and Perry's being thrown in your faces is eerie.  You both would be wiser to own up to guessing wrong... Friendly advice from the wisest, best predictor on the board (who back in June told The Cainmentum Formerly Known As Yelnoc he was crazy for thinking Cain would still be in contention for anything come Fall.)

the ONLY thing I guessed wrong about was Perry's debate performance, which cost him the nomination...which, I am glad because I always stated he was a tool.

I, of course, predicted these terrible performances, probably because as noted on that IQ thread, I am a genius. See, the dots connect together seamlessly yet again! 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I, of course, predicted these terrible performances

I try not to imagine such ignorance...I always said Perry was an invisible governor, but I simply don't understand such poor debate performances (e.g. Perry in 2011, Palin in 2008)...almost every question in these "give me a 30 second reply" debates is a softball question.  

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem, jmfcst, is not that you abandoned Perry. The problem is that while you were supporting him, you did so to such a point as to almost completely preclude yourself the ability of later abandoning him, and still remain credible regarding your next choice(s). You were on the verge of selecting him as nominee on Sept 1st. Now just imagine for a second what a disaster that would have made 2012. If there was a ever a year Republicans should be annoyingly picky to the candidates and completely thorough in selecting the candidate, it was this year. Throwing onself at the feet of any "savior/knight in shining armor" is a good way to end up with a dud facing Obama next fall. 

You state that you are representative of the Republican base, and that may well be so. However, with the erratic nature of your selections, I find it hard not to be troubled by the thought of it being the case. It reminds me far too much of the bandwagon effect which was Obama's candidacy.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The problem, jmfcst, is not that you abandoned Perry. The problem is that while you were supporting him, you did so to such a point as to almost completely preclude yourself the ability of later abandoning him, and still remain credible regarding your next choice(s). You were on the verge of selecting him as nominee on Sept 1st. Now just imagine for a second what a disaster that would have made 2012. If there was a ever a year Republicans should be annoyingly picky to the candidates and completely thorough in selecting the candidate, it was this year. Throwing onself at the feet of any "savior/knight in shining armor" is a good way to end up with a dud facing Obama next fall.

dude, I said he was worthless from the beginning, and I stated I was only supporting him because the jmfcst's would own him....so stop trying to sell me as a Perry fanboy...I'm going to support someone I agree with, and if I can't find that person, then I'll support someone whom I will own.   got it?

---

You state that you are representative of the Republican base, and that may well be so. However, with the erratic nature of your selections, I find it hard not to be troubled by the thought of it being the case. It reminds me far too much of the bandwagon effect which was Obama's candidacy.

my support has reflected the base...if you don't think so then give me an example.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You state that you are representative of the Republican base, and that may well be so. However, with the erratic nature of your selections, I find it hard not to be troubled by the thought of it being the case. It reminds me far too much of the bandwagon effect which was Obama's candidacy.

my support has reflected the base...if you don't think so then give me an example.

I tend not to deal in absolutes on things that something tells me not to assert as something when I don't have the ability to say one way or the other. So "may well be so" is the most you will ever get from me on that score.