PDA

View Full Version : Intrade?



ari1013
06-13-2008, 12:25 PM
Has anyone tried to make any money off intrade?

For those that don't know what it is, essentially you buy/sell winners/losers of elections. For example, they have McCain at 10% for the state of CT. So if you bet $1 that he wins, and he does win, you get $10. Meanwhile if you bet $1 on Obama and he wins, you get $1.11.

As more people buy/sell, the odds change accordingly.

I know some people that made $100's during the primary season.

The interesting thing is that since money is on the line, the odds end up being about right at the end. In 2004, they "predicted" that Bush would win 286 electoral votes to Kerry's 252. That was dead-on.

At this point in time, they're predicting an Obama win with 289-249 electoral breakdown.

There's a conservative website (freerepublic.com) that tabulates the weekly changes in the electoral breakdown. The commentors are all whackos, but again, the intrade results are fundamentally sound:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2028572/posts

That link is to the latest results. They update every Monday around noon.

Bosox Believer
06-17-2008, 01:55 PM
I love how they show McCain and Obama a 50-50 tie in NH and Virginia, but allocate the electoral votes in favor of McCain.:rolleyes:

ari1013
06-18-2008, 12:04 PM
I love how they show McCain and Obama a 50-50 tie in NH and Virginia, but allocate the electoral votes in favor of McCain.:rolleyes:
It's a rightwing site. I said that in the post. The point is that it's still an interesting analysis.

Bosox Believer
06-19-2008, 03:16 PM
It's a rightwing site. I said that in the post. The point is that it's still an interesting analysis.

Oh, I was definately aware of the site's political leanings. I just like to point out how underhanded conservatives can be.

Doc Fluty
06-19-2008, 03:25 PM
Oh, I was definately aware of the site's political leanings. I just like to point out how underhanded conservatives can be.

how is it underhanded if the states polls 50-50 but normally votes R and they assume that it will stay that way?

ari1013
06-19-2008, 03:31 PM
how is it underhanded if the states polls 50-50 but normally votes R and they assume that it will stay that way?
I don't think underhanded is the right word.

Bosox Believer
06-19-2008, 03:51 PM
I don't think underhanded is the right word.

underhanded
Function:
adjective
Date:
1853
: marked by secrecy, chicanery, and deception : not honest and aboveboard : sly <an underhanded attempt to gain power>

This is how I meant it. Particularly the "not honest", "sly" parts.

Bosox Believer
06-19-2008, 03:53 PM
how is it underhanded if the states polls 50-50 but normally votes R and they assume that it will stay that way?

New Hampshire voted Democrat 3 out of the last 4 Presidential contests...

ari1013
06-19-2008, 06:56 PM
underhanded
Function:
adjective
Date:
1853
: marked by secrecy, chicanery, and deception : not honest and aboveboard : sly <an underhanded attempt to gain power>

This is how I meant it. Particularly the "not honest", "sly" parts.
But for that to be the case there would have to be something for them to gain from it. Who the heck cares if they put it in the wrong column. You know better than that.

DenButsu
07-17-2008, 04:09 AM
http://www.intrade.com/images/generated/intrade/pe_obama_mccain.png

SmthBluCitrus
07-17-2008, 10:47 AM
New Hampshire voted Democrat 3 out of the last 4 Presidential contests...

New Hampshire also loves John McCain. That was his first win of the primary season after he had been virtually "left-for-dead" in October. And, some say it spurred his primary campaign on to the win.

I think there's a really good chance that New Hampshire ultimately goes red in November.

ari1013
07-17-2008, 11:53 AM
New Hampshire also loves John McCain. That was his first win of the primary season after he had been virtually "left-for-dead" in October. And, some say it spurred his primary campaign on to the win.

I think there's a really good chance that New Hampshire ultimately goes red in November.
I think that's all blown out of proportion. McCain's consistently been trailing Obama by double digits in New Hampshire.

McCain completely gave up on Iowa and focused 100% on New Hampshire. The other Republicans were all over the place. Romney and Huckabee in Iowa. Guiliani in Florida. Thompson in bed.

But just as they're about to toss out Sununu in favor of Shaheen, New Hampshire voters are going to be voting for Obama come November.

SmthBluCitrus
07-17-2008, 12:20 PM
I think that's all blown out of proportion. McCain's consistently been trailing Obama by double digits in New Hampshire.

McCain completely gave up on Iowa and focused 100% on New Hampshire. The other Republicans were all over the place. Romney and Huckabee in Iowa. Guiliani in Florida. Thompson in bed.

But just as they're about to toss out Sununu in favor of Shaheen, New Hampshire voters are going to be voting for Obama come November.

LoL - hilarious!

Eh, I still think there's a good chance that New Hampshire goes red in November. There's a reason that McCain focused his "return" on New Hampshire -- because New Hampshire loves John McCain.

Even looking back at the 2000 primary, McCain took nearly 50% of the vote about a week after Bush crushed McCain in the Iowa Caucus (41 - 5). Alan Keyes had more support in Iowa than McCain did.

I'm not saying McCain WILL win New Hampshire. But, I am saying that he has a better shot there than people give him credit for -- and considering the other New England states, he has a good chance at turning New Hampshire red.

moonman
07-17-2008, 03:30 PM
Betting on the internet is against the law. So please be careful.

A more accurate measure of each candidate's relative popularity is the monthly fund raising totals. In June, the McCain camp reported receiving a breathtaking 22 million. Impressive number until you see that the Obama campaign reported more than 52 million donated during the same month.

Obama is out fundraising McCain by better than a 2.5 to 1 margin. If this margin remains through November, I would expect Obama exceeding 300 electoral college votes and something in excess of 60% of the popular vote.

SmthBluCitrus
07-17-2008, 03:40 PM
I don't know about that. 60% of the popular is wishful thinking. I don't think that 300 EC votes is out of the question, but 60% is awfully high. I think Obama has the ability to pull it out with about 55%, but that might even be a reach.

moonman
07-17-2008, 04:58 PM
^'Been to a bowling alley or coffee shop lately SmthBluCircus? The vast majority of people recognize we're on the wrong track. '06 was just the beginning.

SmthBluCitrus
07-17-2008, 05:10 PM
^'Been to a bowling alley or coffee shop lately SmthBluCircus? The vast majority of people recognize we're on the wrong track. '06 was just the beginning.

LoL -- I drink coffee at home, and I don't bowl.

But, I do have a bit of authority on this matter. I've worked in politics and I know what people are saying. I've spoken with the general likely voting populace -- indies and targeted registered Republicans. I don't think we'll see 60%.

Regardless of the fact that the majority of Americans think we're on the wrong track, a lot of those same people don't believe that McCain is an extension of the Bush administration. The only people portraying McCain as Bush III is the media. The general population just doesn't see it that way. You don't see Obama talking in those anymore, do you? Know why? It's because it's not working among indies.

While I believe it's true that indie votes will break Obama's direction, they're not going to break hard enough to give him 60% of the popular vote. The numbers are going to be record breaking this year, but you have to understand that votes will split in two directions: people excited about Obama and people voting to keep Obama out of office.

And why are you calling me SmthBluCircus? I don't like the circus ... clowns and elephants really freak me out.

ari1013
07-17-2008, 08:37 PM
LoL -- I drink coffee at home, and I don't bowl.

But, I do have a bit of authority on this matter. I've worked in politics and I know what people are saying. I've spoken with the general likely voting populace -- indies and targeted registered Republicans. I don't think we'll see 60%.

Regardless of the fact that the majority of Americans think we're on the wrong track, a lot of those same people don't believe that McCain is an extension of the Bush administration. The only people portraying McCain as Bush III is the media. The general population just doesn't see it that way. You don't see Obama talking in those anymore, do you? Know why? It's because it's not working among indies.

While I believe it's true that indie votes will break Obama's direction, they're not going to break hard enough to give him 60% of the popular vote. The numbers are going to be record breaking this year, but you have to understand that votes will split in two directions: people excited about Obama and people voting to keep Obama out of office.

And why are you calling me SmthBluCircus? I don't like the circus ... clowns and elephants really freak me out.
One of the reasons we'll never see a candidate even hit 55% any longer is because information is costless these days. That's helped push people further to the left or to the right than they were in the past. We identify much more closely with an individual because we know more about their policies.

In the past it was all about who could get more name recognition -- purely a popularity contest.

But by that same token, a few % here and there, and a single candidate could wind up with well over 300 EVs while only winning 51% of the vote.

ari1013
07-17-2008, 08:39 PM
LoL - hilarious!

Eh, I still think there's a good chance that New Hampshire goes red in November. There's a reason that McCain focused his "return" on New Hampshire -- because New Hampshire loves John McCain.

Even looking back at the 2000 primary, McCain took nearly 50% of the vote about a week after Bush crushed McCain in the Iowa Caucus (41 - 5). Alan Keyes had more support in Iowa than McCain did.

I'm not saying McCain WILL win New Hampshire. But, I am saying that he has a better shot there than people give him credit for -- and considering the other New England states, he has a good chance at turning New Hampshire red.
The same thing happened in 2000 as in 2008. McCain doesn't support ethanol so he didn't bother with Iowa then just like now. And by being the only candidate campaigning, he can build up solid name recognition.

Let's put it this way, Bush polled MUCH better vs. Gore and Kerry in NH than McCain is polling vs. Obama.