Actually if you had posed the same question to me when Huck “won” I would have said the same thing...
***Then there are 3 ways to show that my analysis is correct. 1) Huckabee rose in the polls. 2) No one else questioned the analysis — your friends fell down on the job. 3) The market itself continues to speak, regardless of your hypotheticals.
Your analysis continues to sound like the average Fred follower: “I don’t like it because it doesn’t make my guy look good.” Well, Fred is supposed to be “all-in” for Iowa and this was the last debate before the caucuses. The fact that I’m posting this stuff with forcefulness is a sign that Fred didn’t pull it off. I continue to say that anyone who drops 30 points at Intrade has squandered it, and doesn’t deserve any more resources thrown his way. That’s throwing good money after bad. Time to let the guy who’s gotten this far on a shoestring budget to have the limelight. If you’re honest with yourself, you’ll see this is true.
First, all of that is your opinion.
I could say the same of Hunter. He still doesn’t register in the polls past 0 and the avg. MOE, has been at it months longer and has little if anything to show for it. As you say, if you were honest with yourself you would see that it was true.
If we were to follow your analysis, who is doing well by In Trade, we should put all our resources to Huckabee or the R and R boys...
You are posting this stuff with “Forcefulness” because you are and have been a Hunter supporter. In your opinion and by the barest of numbers of individuals on the trading site Duncan did well. By the opinion of others Fred did, and some say Mitt.
I can take any data and make it fit a scenario if I wish. I don’t because all is in Flux. Like I asked before, what was In Trade saying about Dean’s chances before the scream?
I appreciate your efforts, but you are reaching at times. If you don’t think FDT should have anymore resources, don’t send him any. Thankfully you are not and cannot make that decision for all of us.