New Tradesports rankings

[© tweed]

Clinton and Obama surge in Dem VP market, presumably due to Hillary's comment.

Obama 16.8 (meaning, the market gives him a greater than 50% chance of being VP if he is not nominated for president)
Webb 10.2
Clinton 10.0
Clark 6.5
Richardson 6.2
Gore 5.1
...
Field 40.0

[emailking]

Other stuff
Brokered Democratic convention: 20
Michigan re-vote: 45

Both of these are too high.  I've already explained countless times why a "brokered convention" as Intrade defines it isn't going to happen.  (Hint: If everyone votes for one of two candidates on the first ballot, one of the two will get a majority, unless there's an exact tie.)

John Edwards has not released his pledged delegates. He's under no obligation to either. A brokered convention is entirely possible, even if there is no tie.

[J. J.]

Democratic nomination
Obama 72.5
Clinton 27.0
Gore 1.2
Edwards 0.1

Clinton is highly undervalued, BUY!

[Eraserhead]

Democratic nomination
Obama 72.5
Clinton 27.0
Gore 1.2
Edwards 0.1

Clinton is highly undervalued, BUY!

lol.

[Mr. Morden]

Other stuff
Brokered Democratic convention: 20
Michigan re-vote: 45

Both of these are too high.  I've already explained countless times why a "brokered convention" as Intrade defines it isn't going to happen.  (Hint: If everyone votes for one of two candidates on the first ballot, one of the two will get a majority, unless there's an exact tie.)

John Edwards has not released his pledged delegates. He's under no obligation to either. A brokered convention is entirely possible, even if there is no tie.

It's a very small number of delegates, and even if Edwards holds the balance of power, he will presumably cut a deal *before* the convention, as there's nothing really to be gained by waiting until August.  Anyway, even if a brokered convention is a remote possibility, it's way overvalued on Intrade.

[politicaltipster]

Intrade (the new name for Tradesports) punters think that Clinton is more electable than Obama. My take is that they are both massively overvalued.

http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/punters-think-that-clinton-is-more-electable-than-obama/

[© tweed]

Intrade (the new name for Tradesports) punters think that Clinton is more electable than Obama. My take is that they are both massively overvalued.

extrapolating the winning individual vs. nomination winner isn't very useful.  Gore has been over 100% to win the general if nominated for a while now.

[politicaltipster]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You sometimes get wacky results with fringe candidates because the liquidity in the market is so low (sometimes the last trade on the Presidential contract for a minor candidate and the nomination trade for a candidate can be days apart) . Given that both Hillary and Obama contracts are extremely liquid, this isn't an issue. In any case I'm not a fan of using Intrade as a good measure, but I just thought it would be interesting.

[Verily]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You sometimes get wacky results with fringe candidates because the liquidity in the market is so low (sometimes the last trade on the Presidential contract for a minor candidate and the nomination trade for a candidate can be days apart) . Given that both Hillary and Obama contracts are extremely liquid, this isn't an issue. In any case I'm not a fan of using Intrade as a good measure, but I just thought it would be interesting.

The problem is not illiquidity; there has actually been quite a bit of trading on Gore recently. The problem is transaction cost. It isn't worth it to me to short Gore to win the general while buying him to win the nomination because the transaction cost is higher than any profit I would make. The same is true of the Clinton-Obama discrepancy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Slight reaction to the Mississippi results, numbers now hit roughly post-Potomac Primary numbers.

[© tweed]

Democratic nomination
Obama 73.2
Clinton 26.5
Gore 2.5 (stock is on fire)
Edwards 0.3

Republican nomination
McCain 95.0
Paul 1.9
Giuliani 1.6
Romney 0.8
Huckabee 0.6
Rice 0.4
Gingrich 0.2
Thompson 0.1

Winning party
Democratic 60.2
Republican 41.0
Field 1.0

Winning Individual
Obama 41.4
McCain 39.8
Clinton 18.5
Gore 2.3
Paul 0.7
Bloomberg 0.4
Giuliani 0.2
Romney 0.2
Huckabee 0.1
Edwards 0.1
Field 0.1

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama back up to almost 80 (79.9), Hillary down to 20.0. Probably a result of the Wright story finally biting the dust and Hillary's Bosnia lie.

[Eraserhead]

Obama back up to almost 80 (79.9), Hillary down to 20.0. Probably a result of the Wright story finally biting the dust and Hillary's Bosnia lie.

Probably more to do with Richardson and Obama retaking the lead in the Gallup national poll (not that those things really mean that much).

[elcorazon]

has anybody ever done an analysis of these markets with respect to their accuracy historically?  I know it's hard to actually determine what is accurate, but I have this running debate with someone. 

I contend these markets are inaccurate and don't have much bearing whatsoever on actual possibilities, and that the idea that they are helpful tools in analyzing the race is mostly a myth.

Anyone ever see an analysis of them... or compare them to polls in terms of accuracy.

I think they follow the polls, mostly.

[Torie]

has anybody ever done an analysis of these markets with respect to their accuracy historically?  I know it's hard to actually determine what is accurate, but I have this running debate with someone. 

I contend these markets are inaccurate and don't have much bearing whatsoever on actual possibilities, and that the idea that they are helpful tools in analyzing the race is mostly a myth.

Anyone ever see an analysis of them... or compare them to polls in terms of accuracy.

I think they follow the polls, mostly.

My impression is that they are lagging indicators, not leading ones. I have not done any rigorous review however. Many of the markets are very thinly traded. Oddly enough, the Iowa election markets might be better. For example, it has the GOP with a 47% chance to win the presidency, while intrade has the number around 40%. I think the 47% is a better number, but who knows?

[© tweed]

if they were 'lagging indicators' McCain would be favored to win the presidency right now.

[Torie]

if they were 'lagging indicators' McCain would be favored to win the presidency right now.

Because of the Wright affair?

[© tweed]

if they were 'lagging indicators' McCain would be favored to win the presidency right now.

Because of the Wright affair?

because he leads Obama and Clinton in nearly every national poll.

--

Gore at 3.0 to win the Democratic nomination, btw.

[© tweed]

Democratic nomination
Obama 80.1
Clinton 18.1
Gore 4.0
Edwards 0.2

Republican nomination
McCain 95.0
Giuliani 1.7
Paul 1.5
Romney 1.1
Rice 0.7
Huckabee 0.5
Gingrich 0.3
Thompson 0.2

Winning party
Democratic 59.3
Republican 38.0
Field 0.7

Winning Individual
Obama 47.9
McCain 39.6
Clinton 11.5
Gore 2.5
Paul 0.4
Bloomberg 0.3
Giuliani 0.2
Romney 0.2
Huckabee 0.1
Edwards 0.1
Field 0.1

[Middle-aged Europe]

Republican nomination
McCain 95.0
Giuliani 1.7
Paul 1.5
Romney 1.1
Rice 0.7
Huckabee 0.5
Gingrich 0.3
Thompson 0.2

Um, why is McCain still below 100.0? Do some assume that he could die of old age prior to the convention or what?

[Verily]

Republican nomination
McCain 95.0
Giuliani 1.7
Paul 1.5
Romney 1.1
Rice 0.7
Huckabee 0.5
Gingrich 0.3
Thompson 0.2

Um, why is McCain still below 100.0? Do some assume that he could die of old age prior to the convention or what?

Exactly. They can't close the market until he actually has won the nomination at the RNC. There could be some enormous scandal which would cause McCain to plunge in the GE match-ups and make him withdraw his candidacy. In that case, Romney, Giuliani, etc. would jump back in for the last few primaries, and one of them would win the nomination after a lot of wrangling at the convention.

[© tweed]

Republican nomination
McCain 95.0
Giuliani 1.7
Paul 1.5
Romney 1.1
Rice 0.7
Huckabee 0.5
Gingrich 0.3
Thompson 0.2

Um, why is McCain still below 100.0? Do some assume that he could die of old age prior to the convention or what?

or scandal or assassination or incapacitation.  all of those little probabilities add up to around 5%.

[© tweed]

Democratic nomination
Obama 80.0
Clinton 17.3
Gore 4.8
Edwards 0.2

Republican nomination
McCain 94.1
Giuliani 1.7
Paul 1.5
Romney 1.4
Rice 0.5
Huckabee 0.5
Gingrich 0.3
Thompson 0.2

Winning party
Democratic 59.3
Republican 38.0
Field 0.7

Winning Individual
Obama 47.4
McCain 39.7
Clinton 12.1
Gore 4.5
Paul 0.6
Bloomberg 0.3
Giuliani 0.3
Romney 0.3
Edwards 0.2
Huckabee 0.1
Field 0.1

[© tweed]

Iowa Electronic Markets numbers...



Obama 79.1
Clinton 16.7
Rest of Field 3.6
Edwards 0.1

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No Hillary bump yet on InTrade. I'm actually hoping she does get a fairly sizable one because I bought her stock on the mock one so I could sell it later after the bump and then use the profits to short her at her high numbers.