ZOLTAR’s Crystal Ball Says NYT Will Endorse Elizabeth Warren

It is I, Zoltar, and the last time I posted on SSG, I was hours late to share a savage underdog pick that paid-out like a broken slot machine. That pick was that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would not be indicted, which the PredictIt God’s confirmed with a Gray Box of Death just before my piece went live. Yes, I relished in thieving gold from the pockets of the silly cucks who did not trust in my sage counsel, but it saddened me not to give you, my followers, timely advice. That is why it brings me great joy to share this pick with you and allow you to fill your bags with PredictIt gold. Remember: Those who trust in Zoltar will be rewarded.

This bet is based on the “Who will NY Times endorse market” that is going to resolve on Sunday. 

IMG_1920168EA5D1-1

I pulled up all of the The New York Times articles on each Dem candidate that was published this year and examined them for subtle trends or biases that could be found. To my surprise, if you examine each article in detail and compare them with articles on other candidates, an almost imperceptible preference for one begins to emerge.

Review a sampling of the articles below and see if you can spot the subtle biases and clues shown as to which candidate The New York Times appears to prefer. First, we shall begin with articles published this year that reference Biden. Observe:

Now let’s compare the Biden articles with a sampling of the NY Times articles published this year on Elizabeth Warren.

Look closely and see if you can pick up and clues as to which candidate the NY Times appears to prefer, if any:

For the last batch of articles, let’s look at what The NY Times has published on Pete Buttigieg

Again the reporting may appear, at first blush, to simply present fair and balanced coverage of one candidate versus the other candidates, but if you look closely signals showing preferential treatment of one candidate emerge.

Although it is undoubtedly a close call, The NY Times does appear to show a slight trend of providing more favorable coverage when reporting on Warren compared to the other candidates. I believe this trend is a strong indicator that The NY Times will soon confirm their endorsement of Warren over the other candidates. The only other long shot I would recommend buying a few lottos on is Amy Klobuchar in order to hedge if The NY Times editorial board wants to go with the long shot.

Final Zoltar pick

Buy No shares on Bernie, Buttigieg, and Biden. Max out Yes shares on Warren and get some lottos to hedge and break even if Amy K pulls in the upset.

What’s that? You still are not satisfied? Need a little more convincing? Ok fine. Below please find article regarding who the staff considered to be the winners and losers of the January debate from a week ago. Shocker…Warren came in first. Read the comments on Biden (the next most favored candidate on PredictIt) and ask yourself if those descriptions sounds like the candidate that will get an endorsement from the The NY Times a week later.

Also, for what its worth, Biden’s campaign manager publicly blasted The NY Times for biased coverage in letter that Biden’s campaign staff wrote and made public. A copy of the letter is also below. Im guessing half his campaign staff has No shares on this market right now but he is also one of the only candidates who thinks capitalism is good, so not too surprising.

Until next time….

Those who trust in Zoltar will be rewarded.

Liked it? Take a second to support Zoltar on Patreon!

5 thoughts

  1. Hmm, I guess you were right and wrong? Thankfully I hedged and put some money on Klobuchar as well and ended up making some money here.

    1. I applaud Zoltar for his call here. I was a beta and just took N Buttigieg and bought a few Biden lottos. I should have trusted in Zoltar like you!

  2. How did PredictIt handle a 2-person endorsement? Did they pay $1 for both? Or only 50 cents each? I don’t know how to see markets that have closed in which I had no stake.

    1. They paid only for Klobuchar because her last name is alphabetically first, before Warren. That is crazy and I have lost much respect for the Predictit platform as a result of the way they handled this, even though I made some money.

    2. They had some weird FAQ rule that paid out all the money in alphabetical order. So all money to Klob, no money to Liz W.

Leave a Reply