Intrade (while we're at it): The Gold Standard

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

I don't go to the polls, 538, or Vegas when I want to know what's what. I look at Intrade.

"...Intrade isn't just about betting. Its users are -- taken together -- shockingly good at correctly forecasting election results.

Intrade bettors correctly picked the winner of every single state during the 2004 presidential election. In 2008, they missed two -- wrongly calling Indiana for John McCain and Missouri for Barack Obama.

And that is way, way more accurate than most single polls -- to say nothing of the predictions offered by the professional pundit class.

"Most of the evidence certainly suggests looking at prediction markets will give you a better handle on elections than looking at polling data," said Forrest Nelson, a professor at the University of Iowa, who helps run the Iowa Electronic Market."

-CNNMoney
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/15/news/economy/intrade_election_polling/index.htm


Obama (to win) 61% likely

Romney 39%

Democratic Electoral Votes 294

Republican Electoral Votes 249

Obama to win Ohio 59.4%

Obama to win VA 45.6%

Obama to win CO 48.1%

Obama to win FL 31%

Obama to win Wisconsin 68%

Scott Brown to win in MA 17%

Obama + Dem Senate + R House 51.3%

Romney + R Senate + R House 21.8% (next likely)

Dems control Senate 65%

Republicans control Senate 24.4%

50-50 12.1%

Democrats control House 6.8%

Republicans control House 93.2%

(have to run!)


http://www.intrade.com/v4/home/

[skiptaylor]

1. Intrade

My experience is that Intrade has been very unreliable

[Lex]

5. What part of this is unreliable

"Intrade bettors correctly picked the winner of every single state during the 2004 presidential election. In 2008, they only missed two states"

from the OP

[gcomeau]

13. They just bet what the polling aggregate said to bet

...which is hardly an argument to use it instead of polling.

[On the Road]

18. If That Were True, Intrade Would Have the Same Record as the Polls

but the claim is that they are better.

[grantcart]

9. lol very insightful. Well if you really believe that it is unreliable then you should cash

out and bet against the majority, you would be a millionaire skip.

[Lifelong Protester]

2. Except for the Scott Brown thing

I like what you're selling...

[aquart]

6. I thought a 17% chance of Brown winning was a good thing.

Did I read it wrong?

[LadyHawkAZ]

7. ?

They have Warren at 82.3% to win, Scotty at 17.0%. What's not to like?

[dsc]

14. that seems awfully low

I know his polling went south but if I could get the odds that bet would bring and I was a Brown partisan I would take that bet. I do think he is more likely to lose than win but I don't think he is 5 times more likely to lose than win.

[Lifelong Protester]

22. Jeez, I'm up past my bedtime again!

I read it wrong, I was seeing it as Brown up by 17%. Better stop typing after 10:00 PM, I guess.

[LadyHawkAZ]

23. I understand completely!

I do that all the time.

[PoliticAverse]

3. Intrade may be "shockingly good at correctly forecasting election results", but only if you look...

at the the numbers right before the actual election.

[Quixote1818]

21. That is exactly right

If the election were held today things would probably turn out just like the betting shows but things happen and can begin to shift. There could be an October surprise that could shake things up big time.

[Egalitarian Thug]

4. Thanks, but I'll stick with the professionals.

http://www.politicalbettingodds.com/2012-us-presidential-election-odds.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Yeah, Romenesia Is A Worse Than 3-1 Dog At Some Offshore Betting Sites

,

[Poiuyt]

15. I'm not a gambler - how do you read that site?

Barack Obama: -260
Mitt Romney: +200

What does that mean?

[PoliticAverse]

16. It means you have to risk $260 to get an additional $100 if Obama wins....

but if you risk $100 on Romney you'll get $200 if he wins.

So
bet $260 on Obama get back $360 (the $260+$100) if Obama wins.
or
bet $100 on Romney and get back $300 (the $100+$200) if Romney wins.

In other words, Obama is a big favorite.

Odds quoted this way are known as 'Moneyline' or 'American' odds.

[Poiuyt]

17. Thanks!

[Egalitarian Thug]

20. And from me as well. I tend to get wrapped up in unnecessary explanations. n/t

[Stargleamer]

10. It looks like Intrade shows that most of our hopes lie with Ohio. . .

as Virginia isn't as high a possibility in comparison. If Ohio is stolen, then our next best likely hope is a Colorado (48%) + New Hampshire(59%) combination , which we are a slight underdog to bring about. Then if we win neither of those states our hope lie with Virginia where we have a 45% chance.

I hate being reliant on Ohio, given that Ryan and Romney are inundating the poor folk there with lies and deceit.

[AndyTiedye]

19. I Hate Being Reliant on Ohio Because We Know They Can Steal It

[grantcart]

11. I agree. It will get very serious after the third debate. If he wins Ohio Obama wins.

[andym]

12. Intrade tends to track 538 these days.... nt.