New Tradesports rankings

[Mr. Morden]

Intraders have very little faith in Clinton.  Dem. nomination:

Obama 71.0
Clinton 29.2

Obama hits 50 in winning individual:

Obama 50.0
McCain 32.9
Clinton 19.5
Huckabee 1.0

Incredibly, Gore is now the favorite in the Dem. VP market:

Gore 11.2
Clark 10.0
Richardson 9.9
Bayh 7.7
Clinton 7.4
Edwards 6.8
Obama 6.5
Webb 6.5

[So the Heroes Fall]

Short Gore for easy money.

[MSUfan]

Right now I'd put Obama at 55% and Clinton at 45%

[Verily]

Short Gore for easy money.

And Clinton, too, Short her down to 0.1.

[Erc]

Intraders have very little faith in Clinton.  Dem. nomination:

Obama 71.0
Clinton 29.2

That's excessive.  It'll only get worse after she loses tomorrow (yay irrational markets), so hold off on buying Clinton until Wednesday at least.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I think Clinton should be higher then that. It should be more like this:

71.0
29.8

[Former Moderate]

Intraders have very little faith in Clinton.  Dem. nomination:

Obama 71.0
Clinton 29.2

That's excessive.  It'll only get worse after she loses tomorrow (yay irrational markets), so hold off on buying Clinton until Wednesday at least.

Yes, Intrade loves overreacting.  I dumped my shares of Clinton already, and I'm waiting to buy some back after the crash.

[Mr. Morden]

Clinton is still dropping in winning individual, possibly down to her lowest level since September 2006:

Obama 48.1
McCain 32.7
Clinton 17.3

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

This is certainly a little overboard. She is still the favorite in Ohio at least.

[So the Heroes Fall]

For some reason Hillary is surging. she's up over 8 points to over 33, with Obama dropping the same. What's the reason?

I'm guessing it's just because Obama developed a bit of a bubble which is bursting now. Unless InTraders think RUMORS of an Edwards endorsement are that important, which would be the epitome of overreacting.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Obama rebounds back to 70. The market is just crazy now.

[Verily]

Clinton is still dropping in winning individual, possibly down to her lowest level since September 2006:

Obama 48.1
McCain 32.7
Clinton 17.3

Clinton's actually probably still overvalued on this market. So is Obama. McCain should be higher.

[Reignman]

bump.

[Speed of Sound]

bump.

Dude, a bump with no numbers? Injustice!


Uber Mega Super Obama Winning Idividual Surge. These guys are officially ALL on crack. He is now closing in on breaking 50%!

Dem. Nom.

Obama  72.0
Clinton 27.5

Winning Idv.

Obama 48.6
McCain 34.4
Clinton 17.0

Winning Party

Dem 66.1
Rep 34.0

[Lief]

I'd buy myself a lot of Clinton in preparation of Tuesday.

[Sensei]

i'd buy a crapload of Clinton right now if I didn't have to do fun stuff like eat.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I'd buy myself a lot of Clinton in preparation of Tuesday.

Why? She'll likely lose both states which would just send her numbers lower. The time to buy Clinton is before March 4.

[Lief]

Wisconsin is a toss-up, at best, and with the over-reactions of these people, Clinton could gain quite a bit. You might even be able to make some money when Wisconsin isn't called immediately and people start buying Clinton.

[Mr. Morden]

Here's a pretty good article on the problems with Intrade:

link

[So the Heroes Fall]

Wisconsin is a toss-up, at best, and with the over-reactions of these people, Clinton could gain quite a bit. You might even be able to make some money when Wisconsin isn't called immediately and people start buying Clinton.

How can Wisconsin be anything other than Lean Obama? The electoral laws greatly favor him, he's seriously competing, she isn't, and he leads in every poll that isn't ARG.

Meanwhile if Hillary wins, that means ARG is right while every other pollster is wrong. Think about that.

[Lief]

Wisconsin Democratic primaries are notorious for swinging en masse one way or another at the last minute. In '88, they swung strongly to Dukakis while in 2004 they swung strongly to Edwards. As polls consistently show Obama with only a 4-5% lead, a large swing of undecideds towards Clinton could give her the win. I just have a hard time calling a state where Obama has a 4% lead a "lean Obama" state.

[So the Heroes Fall]

What happened in 2004 was the independents turned out bigger than expected and voted Edwards. Note Edwards won one congressional district in Wisconsin, also the most affluent and Republican district in the state. Why would Edwards play better in such a place rather than the poor parts of Wisconsin with his whole populist, anti-poverty message? Because there were few Democrats, and the independents and Republicans made up a larger share of the electorate. Also note this district had the third highest turnout despite the worst showing for Democrats in the general election. This year the non-Democrats will obviously favor Obama.

[J. J.]

Dem. Nom.

Obama  72.0
Clinton 27.5 Buy big time

Winning Idv.

Obama 48.6
McCain 34.4
Clinton 17.0 Buy big time

Winning Party

Dem 66.1
Rep 34.0  Buy

[Mr. Morden]

Why would Edwards play better in such a place rather than the poor parts of Wisconsin with his whole populist, anti-poverty message?

It wasn't just Wisconsin.  There were quite a few states in 2004 in which the exit polls actually showed Kerry doing better among downscale voters and Edwards doing better among upscale voters....possibly just due to the fact that downscale voters pay less attention to politics, and might just be more willing to go with whoever's perceived as a "winner" (i.e., the frontrunner), as hypothesized here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040312124126/http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=1342

Wisconsin exit polls are turning up what looks like a paradox: Despite John Kerry's aloof-liberal-Brahmin rap, and despite John Edwards's heavy "son-of-a-mill-worker" shtick, Kerry did better last night among less educated, less affluent, blue-collar, and rural voters than he did among more educated, more affluent, white-collar, suburban voters, while the opposite was true for Edwards.
.
.
.
My own hunch is that what we're seeing is an important divide between less sophisticated voters and more sophisticated voters. Just about the only thing less sophisticated voters--who, I'm guessing, tend to be poorer and less well-educated--know about John Kerry is that he's been winning, and possibly that he's a longtime Senator and a Vietnam veteran....Which is to say, less affluent, less educated voters are looking at John Kerry's string of primary victories and concluding from them that he's electable.

[Sam Spade]

I wouldn't bet anything trying to predict the habits of Wisconsin voters - it's a foolhardy exercise.