latest Betfair odds

[IceSpear]

Looks like Rubio will be the Palin of 2016.

[IceSpear]

Dems

Clinton 68.5
Warren 8.8
Biden 6.4
Cuomo 3.3
O'Malley 2.1

GOP

Rubio 16.8
Bush 13.4
Paul 11.6
Christie 10.5
Romney 8.8
Cruz 6.0
Walker 5.3
Perry 4.5
Ryan 4.5
Huckabee 3.3
Jindal 2.8

Four years ago at this time on Intrade:

Romney 29.0
Thune 18.5
Palin 17.1
Pawlenty 12.5
Daniels 10.0
Gingrich 9.5
Barbour 7.6
Huckabee 6.1
Paul 5.5
J. Bush 5.3
Jindal 5.0
Pence 4.7
Christie 4.0
Ryan 3.0
others below 2.0

Eight years ago at this time on Intrade:

Democrats

Clinton 39.4 (-1.1)
Warner 17.5 (-1.0)
Gore 17.2 (+2.2)
Edwards 9.1 (+.1)
Kerry 3.5 (+.2)
Bayh 3.0 (+.8 )
Feingold 2.7 (-0.9)
Others at or under 2.1

Republicans

McCain 40.0 (+2.0)
Giuliani 16.1 (+.1)
Romney 15.3 (+2.1 )
Allen 11.5 (-1.5)
Rice 5.1 (-.8 )
Gingrich 4.0 (+0.8 )
Others at or under 2.0

Impossible! Hillary was just as overwhelming a favorite in 2008 as she is now!

[IceSpear]

Perry now all the way up to a tie for 4th place:

Rubio 16.8
Bush 12.8
Paul 12.2
Christie 10.5
Perry 10.5
Romney 8.4
Cruz 5.8
Walker 5.0
Ryan 4.5
Huckabee 3.3

I think Huckabee and Perry are undervalued. Rubio is WAY overvalued in this.

Huckabee isn't going to run (he just wants the attention), and Perry has no prayer because the establishment isn't going to let a guy who got indicted get the nomination. Agreed on Rubio though.

[IceSpear]

Why has Walker not surged? Are these people on crack?

[IceSpear]

Interesting that Dems are actually doing better in the "winning party" bet than they were at this point in the 2012 cycle. Then again, back then we didn't know if 2010 would spell doom for Obama or if it was just a Democratic midterm problem, and now we do.

[IceSpear]

These betters are quite fickle.

[IceSpear]

Very interesting that the betters are sticking with Jeb over Romney for now...

[IceSpear]

Democrats
Clinton 78.1
Warren 10.5
Biden 4.0
Gillibrand 2.5
Cuomo 2.1
O'Malley 2.1
Webb 1.8

Eight years ago today on Intrade:

Democrats
Clinton 47.6
Obama 19.7
Edwards 13.9
Gore 9.4
Richardson 2.6
Biden 1.2
Clark 1.1
Vilsack 1.0
Warner 0.7
Dodd 0.5

b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but just as inevitable!!111!1!!!! NOBODY GAVE THE JUNIOR SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS WHO CAME OUT OF NOWHERE EVEN A 1% CHANCE!!11!!111!!11111!1111!!!!1!!1

[IceSpear]

Democrats
Clinton 78.1
Warren 10.5
Biden 4.0
Gillibrand 2.5
Cuomo 2.1
O'Malley 2.1
Webb 1.8

Eight years ago today on Intrade:

Democrats
Clinton 47.6
Obama 19.7
Edwards 13.9
Gore 9.4
Richardson 2.6
Biden 1.2
Clark 1.1
Vilsack 1.0
Warner 0.7
Dodd 0.5

b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but just as inevitable!!111!1!!!! NOBODY GAVE THE JUNIOR SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS WHO CAME OUT OF NOWHERE EVEN A 1% CHANCE!!11!!111!!11111!1111!!!!1!!1

You make me want Hillary to be primaried even more than I already do.

Well, I suppose it would be annoying when false "2008 redux!" talking points are debunked by empiricial data if I was on the anti-Hillary side.

But anyway, you can hope all you want. It's just the delusion of certain individuals that's annoying. I hated Jim Inhofe and wanted him to lose in 2014, yet you didn't see me pelting the forum with hackneyed platitudes like "Inhofe is not inevitable!", "anything can happen in politics!", "the election is still ___ months away!", "a week is a lifetime in politics!", etc. In fact, I'm pretty sure the same thing applies to 90% of the forum.

[IceSpear]

Morden, just out of curiosity, how are you calculating these? In the initial post it says to take the reciprocal of the odds listed, but they don't seem to match with the figures you posted (ex: Bush is at 5/2 which would be 40%, but you have him at 34.7%.)

[IceSpear]

Morden, just out of curiosity, how are you calculating these? In the initial post it says to take the reciprocal of the odds listed, but they don't seem to match with the figures you posted (ex: Bush is at 5/2 which would be 40%, but you have him at 34.7%.)

Sorry, to clarify, I'm giving the numbers from "Betfair Exchange", rather than the conventional Betfair bookie numbers.  Betfair Exchange, as far as I can tell, works like Intrade did, in being "peer-to-peer" between users, rather than having the prices set by bookies.  Betfair Exchange is listed on the right hand side of the Oddschecker page.  If you view the #s in decimal form (which you can do under "site settings" on the left), then it currently lists Bush at 2.88, and 1/2.88 = 34.7.

Ah, got it. Thanks.

[IceSpear]

Jeb is rising despite his recent missteps and fall in the polls?

[IceSpear]

If I were a betting man I would put my money on Rubio and Biden as the nominees. Would take the long shot with Biden.

You wouldn't be a betting man for very long then.

To be fair to him, there are apparently still a lot of very stupid people betting on Elizabeth Warren.

[IceSpear]

I want to know what idiot is betting on a Jindal nomination.

Yeah, pretty dumb, but not nearly the biggest offenders. For instance, Warren is nearly twice as high as he is. Are there low info betters just like there are low info voters?

[IceSpear]

I'd be buying Clinton, Walker, and Kasich shares. Kasich in particular seems undervalued. Not that I think he'd instantly jump into the top tier if he entered, but he'd be in a decent spot if Jeb fumbled the ball. Seems pretty silly that he's behind a bunch of people who would never have a prayer in a million years (Carson, Trump, Fiorina).

[IceSpear]

Rubio dropping like a rock. Looks like the markets are finally starting to notice the media hype was an illusion.

Jeb is WAY overvalued though.

[IceSpear]

Rubio surges but where the hell is he?
When McCain's campaign collapsed in 2007 he worked his ass off in New Hampshire to get his comeback. He didn't waste his time campaigning in irrelevent states like Ohio and Utah.

It's not so much Rubio's accomplishments that are causing his surge, it's the fact that Jeb is floundering, Walker is gone, and the "Trump/Carson/Cruz have no chance" crew have nowhere else to jump ship to.

[IceSpear]

How was Gore so high at this point in 08?  The democratic party had a very strong slate, there was no need for a savior.

Only in retrospect. I'm sure in 2007/2008 there were plenty of Beltway insiders (Gore's only constituency) pining for an alternative to the "polarizing" Clinton, "inexperienced" Obama, and "untrustworthy" Edwards.

There's always a market among the Beltway pundits for a white horse mythical candidacy that never materializes. Like 57 Republicans are running and they're still chatting about Mitt.

[IceSpear]

I want to meet the people betting on O'Malley.

[IceSpear]

I want to meet the people betting on O'Malley.

They are probably betting on a small chance that Hillary has to drop out due to a health reason or something like that, and her support goes to O'Malley rather than Sanders, which seems plausible.

I guess so, but even in that scenario I'd think Sanders would be heavily favored.

[IceSpear]

I want to meet the people betting on O'Malley.

They are probably betting on a small chance that Hillary has to drop out due to a health reason or something like that, and her support goes to O'Malley rather than Sanders, which seems plausible.

I guess so, but even in that scenario I'd think Sanders would be heavily favored.

Yeah, in that scenario, Biden almost certainly jumps in and runs a competitive race against Sanders.

If it's just Sanders against O'Malley, then based on name recognition/fundraising/organizational strength/etc. alone, Sanders crushes him. There wouldn't be enough time for a lackluster candidate like O'Malley to close the kind of gap that exists between them on so many important metrics.

Filing deadlines would be a problem for Biden if the health issue arose into next year though.

[IceSpear]

Trump is ridiculously low.

Give them time. It took them months to finally realize Jeb was doomed.

[IceSpear]

How is Clinton only 4 higher on the nomination than in Iowa?

[IceSpear]

As expected, Trump is tanking and Rubio is surging. Despite exceeding expectations and WINNING, Cruz only gets a small bump. lol

[IceSpear]

Overreacting over one state.

Still, the case has to be made for a one-day 50-state primary. The fact that a few thousand knobs in Iowa have such a disproportionately high influence in selecting the president is outrageous.

I've always favored the ideas of states voting in blocks.